The 2017 Election Thread

[TheDemonLord]

Because he loves to try and come across as intelligent, and thought provoking. When what he actually needs to read, is this.

Attachment 334902 Remember these wise words, oh Great Tossbag. Put that lil willy down for a min.

Just for you:

[Graystone]

Yes.... Do you think that magically on someones 17th Birthday that suddenly the stats flip? Bearing in mind I linked 2 studies - both reaching the same conclusion, with different population groups.



Most of them where either self taught, child prodigies or in the 20th century. Just look at the IT industry - that has existed in it's entirety after Women had the Vote, Equal Pay act and the benefits of the Activism from the 1960s-1970s - All of the major companies and innovations - all founded by Men.

If your implied premise was correct, surely we should have seen some of these companies founded by Women, yet off the top of my head, I can't think of any.

Then you have the second problem - that throughout history, there has been exceptional Females, like Grace Hopper or Ada Lovelace or Agatha Christie or Mary Shelley - who manage to succeed during those times of "unfair advantage over women" - so if they could do it....



I disagree, a bigot is someone who says that an individual of the group MUST exhibit the traits of said group. I've never said that. Perhaps a different tack: If I said that the ratio of people over 6 ft tall was heavily skewed in favour of Men vs Women - Would you call me a bigot still? You could, but it's an observable difference between the Genders, yet say that there is a similar variability at the extremes for IQ and suddenly it's all "Sexist Bigot" - despite a number of studies showing this to be the case.



It's not imperceptible if we can measure it.... As for Biology - well, we also know that IQ is something like 80% hereditary, so that would be Biology, We also know that variability for any given trait is much greater in Men than in Women - this extends across multiple species.

As for biology being sexist:

One group gets: 50% extra Muscle Mass, Height advantage, Reach advantage, denser bones, larger adrenal glands, more direct neural pathways, better spatial awareness, better emotional regulation/stability, and a greater chance of being a genius.

The other gets: Periods, more susceptible to Negative Emotion, Pregnancy, a shorter time period to sort their affairs in order.



That's a very interesting discussion - there are a multitude of suggested theories including:

- Affirmative action programs for Women
- Educational shifts in favour of Women*
- A huge increase in activist/female centric courses
- Universities becoming bastions of Political Correctness

* It's been theorised that a move away from traditional testing at the end of the year (with a single correct answer - where boys tend to perform better) to more micro-assessment (where Girls tend to perform better), a move to integrated schools away from single sex schools (where Boys tend to perform better), Expectations of Feminine behavior being placed on boys (having to sit still and quietly for long periods of time) and finally the drop in Male teachers.

I don't know how accurate those are - however in the Hard Science and Engineering courses, Men are still dominating, and there has been an observed correlation between courses that have a strong focus on Political correctness/radical left bias and a higher proportion of Women in those courses .

Jacinda is 37, that's 21 years for a gradual change...

Societal change is also a gradual thing.

...then imagine what they could have done without such impediments!

Disagree, a bigot is someone who is exhibits intolerance towards a group or someone within that group, and you're clearly not tolerating a women prime minister very well.

And there it is, the affirmative action excuse, you dismissed the clear and documented educational bias favoring men and advocate their intellectual merit in the same post you dismiss women's intellectual merit in favor of some bullshit excuse. Congratulations you fucking sexist piece of shit, you win all the bigotry points.

[Brian d marge]

Oh look a baby ..... Meanwhile as the canoe without a paddle is signed away



Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk

[mashman]

Oh look a baby ..... Meanwhile as the canoe without a paddle is signed away

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk

Mate, they can barely handle the PM being pregnant.

[Brian d marge]

Mate, they can barely handle the PM being pregnant.

If we had any Bath water we could throw both the baby and the water out
But we sold the wrong friggen thing

Should have sold Rosemary to the Chinese and kept the water

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk

[mashman]

If we had any Bath water we could throw both the baby and the water out
But we sold the wrong friggen thing

Should have sold Rosemary to the Chinese and kept the water

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk

... Mate, they can barely handle the PM being pregnant.

[TheDemonLord]

Jacinda is 37, that's 21 years for a gradual change...

Reaaaaally doesn't work like that. At the moment - the best theory is 80% hereditary, with the other 20% of IQ being determined in the Formative years. There's been a number of studies done where kids with Average IQ were placed in accelerator type school programs - the theory being that with access to the highest quality of Education, it might improve. Problem is, it didn't. Those 'IQ games' that you see on the net - not improvement in IQ there either. What we know, is that once your IQ is bounded, that's it, and the limits are 'set' well before the age of 16 (or 37) - granted there is some elasticity (namely peak problem solving tends to be about age 25) but these increase and decrease rather uniformly.

The TL;DR is - Men and Women have the same Median IQ, but Men have a flatter curve. Now - if you've got some form of study that refutes that, I'm all ears.

Note - the curves don't preclude women from being Geniuses - it's just the same like height - the higher up the IQ spectrum you go, the more the ratio gets tilted towards men.

Societal change is also a gradual thing.

It is, and we've been trying desperately hard for the last 60 years and despite those efforts, the underlying premise hasn't been proven, if anything, it's been disproven - namely that if we give women, everything Men have supposedly had for centuries, they will occupy the same positions as Men do, to the same ratio. What we actually see, is the Nordic Paradox - which, in the countries that have done the most to try and socially engineer and correct the so-called Gender imbalance, where women are the most free to pursue their desires - you still end up with about 9:1 Female to Male Nurses and the inverse for engineering.

...then imagine what they could have done without such impediments!

They all did just fine with such Impediments and a fair number of those impediments (given the social class systems of the time) existed for Men also.

But as above - your underlying premise is not proved and there's quite a bit of real world data to say it's actually been disproved.

Disagree, a bigot is someone who is exhibits intolerance towards a group or someone within that group, and you're clearly not tolerating a women prime minister very well.

If you are going to resort to strawmannig me, then you've lost the debate. I've never said anything bad about Jacinda being a PM due to her Gender - I've raised that fact I don't like her Socialist leanings and I don't like how the election result was decided as to me it defied democracy. My issue is with her getting Pregnant so soon, which to me is irresponsible and opens up a range of possibilities and considerations that may impact her ability to the job.

And there it is, the affirmative action excuse, you dismissed the clear and documented educational bias favoring men and advocate their intellectual merit in the same post you dismiss women's intellectual merit in favor of some bullshit excuse. Congratulations you fucking sexist piece of shit, you win all the bigotry points.

It's not an excuse - I merely said that it's one of the theories and even pointed out I don't know.

What I do know however, is that Education has very very very very little impact on IQ - at most it's estimated to move it 1 or 2 points.

Stop conflating the 2. If you want to dismiss the multiple studies I've linked - feel free to post up your own evidence. Otherwise, calling me names whilst failing to Cite a source to backup your assertion (cause that's all it is fyi) is just an elaborate way of admitting you've lost the debate.

And furthermore - I've never said women can't be intelligent - what I've said is - that when you get to the extremes of intelligence (up above the 140 range) it is almost all Men. The people in those extreme ranges are the ones who have made the most groundbreaking changes to our life as we know it.

As for why more Women are going to Uni and getting doctorates - I genuinely don't know - there are some good reasons suggested, some which sound a little more conspiratorial but have some grains of truth. I will put it to you however that the changes in the schooling system have adversely affected Men - to the point that even if I take your original claim as valid, you should be concerned about - afterall, one group getting an advantage at the expense of another is wrong, right?

[Voltaire]

Mate, they can barely handle the PM being pregnant.

who is 'they" , the only ones I see getting in a frenzy are that laughable group of time wasters known as the Media.

Still as a song once said the public wants what the public get.

[mashman]

who is 'they" , the only ones I see getting in a frenzy are that laughable group of time wasters known as the Media.

Still as a song once said the public wants what the public get.

Frenzy ... nah, that requires emotion and shits to be given.

Some people might get some pleasure out of hate...

[Katman]

who is 'they" , the only ones I see getting in a frenzy are that laughable group of time wasters known as the Media.

And TheDemonLard.

[Crasherfromwayback]

I don't like how the election result was decided as to me it defied democracy. My issue is with her getting Pregnant so soon, which to me is irresponsible and opens up a range of possibilities and considerations that may impact her ability to the job.

Bro, once again. For a guy that thinks he's smart, you're coming across as a real thick cunt.

[Banditbandit]

My issue is with her getting Pregnant so soon, which to me is irresponsible and opens up a range of possibilities and considerations that may impact her ability to the job.

Mate - if you listen to what was said ... Jacinda and Clarke were told they would need medical help to get pregnant (probably means IVF or alternatives) - so they parked a family while she followed her career.

That means they probably did not practice contraception (why bother?) So this pregnancy is a complete surprise - it is not a deliberate decision - so you cannot say that it is irresponsible ... a surprise with unfortunate timing is about he best you can say ..

Clarke will be a stay at home father - and look after the kid. I do not see how this will impact on her job (except while she drops the sprog) - no more than a pregnancy affects the man's job (wife stays home to look after the kids). In his case father stays home to look after the kid while wife works.

Please consider not being a sexist shit before replying ..

[TheDemonLord]

That means they probably did not practice contraception (why bother?) So this pregnancy is a complete surprise - it is not a deliberate decision - so you cannot say that it is irresponsible ... a surprise with unfortunate timing is about he best you can say ..

If you don't practice contraception and you don't want to have a Baby - that's Irresponsible.

To quote Jeremy Kyle: "Why didn't you put something on the end of it?"

I'm holding them to the exact same standard as I would hold a twenty something unemployed couple on the aforementioned show saying "Well, I thought I couldn't get pregnant" - that doesn't hold any water with me, and neither does this...

Clarke will be a stay at home father - and look after the kid. I do not see how this will impact on her job (except while she drops the sprog) - no more than a pregnancy affects the man's job (wife stays home to loo after the kids). In his case father stays home to look after the kid while wife works.

Please consider not being a sexist shit before replying ..

Do you disagree then that there are unique physiological and neurological changes that only women go through during the course of Pregnancy and approximately 2 years after Child Birth?

Some of these changes (as well documented) have the possibility (not guarantee) to impact a Woman's ability to actively do their job. Given the nature of the job - that is something we should discuss.

Then, we have the matter of what the overwhelming majority of Professional, Career women do once they have kids - they choose (of their own free will, not forced by the mythical Patriarchy) Family over Career - the degree varies from Woman to Woman - but there is still a majority trend. And this trend, given the nature of the job is also something to discuss.

If it makes me a Sexist shit to point this out, then fuck it, I'm the Lord highpriest of Misogyny.

I'm not saying Jacinda can't do her job, nor am I saying she shouldn't be given a fair crack, but I am saying that this raises some possibilities that merit discussion, and should anything befall the prime minister (and I genuinely hope it doesn't) - we are then stuck with effectively an un-elected MP as Prime Minister - which is also something that merits discussion.

[Honest Andy]

Hahaha you're quoting jeremy Kyle... what a wanker

[Banditbandit]

If you don't practice contraception and you don't want to have a Baby - that's Irresponsible.

Mate - the medical profession tells you you won't get pregnant without help ... do you believe them or not?

The medical profession tells you you have cancer .. the flu, pneumonia etc .. do you believe them or not? Well, yeah - II know conspiracy freaks don't believe them - but sane people do.