erejnion: >I have what you would call a theoretical basis.
erejnion: oh god
erejnion: now I must agree with her
erejnion: Hitler had what you would call a theoretical basis that the Germans were superior to everybody else, thus everybody else is subject to pruning. And now I feel bad for this reducto ad Hitlerum, but in this case it actually is _exactly_ like this.
erejnion: is there any point in finishing the video?
erejnion: I am on the 34th minute.
ah4o0o: There is not much after that.
ah4o0o: It shows a bunch of other retards saying the same thing.
ah4o0o: I watched only from where I linked it.
ah4o0o: Also, while we are talking about Hitler, I have been considering for a long while to explore /pol/'s ideas about him, but never really bothered. Maybe some day in the summer.
erejnion: We should *treat* the situation on a personal level as if there are no differences between genders, because anything of the sort is only statistics. Taken in large numbers, the different genders show different traits; however, if we single out a person, he may as well show entirely opposite traits to what is the mean in his gender. After all, these things are just normal distributions, the fact that the peak is to the right doesn't mean that a lot of people are not to the left. Thus, if speaking on a basis of a single person, it doesn't matter at all what gender is he.
erejnion: A lot of companies can't really headhunt every employee in an individual manner, of course.
erejnion: On the other hand, I don't feel like any side of this feminism debate has any idea that these traits are a matter of distribution.
erejnion: Of course, academical feminism is as extreme and black and white as it gets, but I wouldn't completely agree with reasonable antifeminists either.
erejnion: But that's at large a fault of the media that reports on this.
erejnion: It's the journalists that can't into distributions, I suspect the actual science that is done on this topic works only with distributions.