We're just nameless stones

Excerpt that I kind of wanted to save.

ah4o0o: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p5LRdW8xw70&t=1722
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: hm
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.
[...]

Off to the mountains for the next two days

Sugita always plays the best characters

Expelled from Paradise

girlwriteswhat p2

girlwriteswhat generally uses similar tactics to mainstream feminism, such as generalizing from single cases, and trying to scare people into action; however I can't really blame her, as these tactics have proved the only effective ones. I can blame her for not openly admitting it more often, but whatever, that'd be counterproductive. The main difference, however, is that she is the minority voice right now, so it's easier for her to ground her beliefs into real studies; as in, she is the "next generation", while the previous generation has already set views and beliefs based on the previous iteration of studies, most of which are disproved now. Give it some decades, and the tables will turn, society will change somewhat, and definitely new studies will arise, ones that contradict her views. Hopefully then she will remember her words about the Harvard switch, and not stomp down on free speech the way current feminism does in the US. But eh, there will be assholes then too. The ruling ideology will be kept up and defended by assholes always.

...


aaaaaaaaaand I am done reading her articles, related material, and generally anything pertaining to feminism and ~issues; it's high time to study something that is actually related to my own major.

girlwriteswhat

Yeah, she has set beliefs and readily defends them --aggressively so, if you want.

She isn't more aggressive than me.

And it was certainly refreshing to see somebody keeping up this side of the conversation, especiall after feminism went so deep into the "let's curb all discussion, we are the ones who are right" territory.

I fucking hate any notion of lessening the diversity any system of our human race exhibits.

GO FOR IT HAMSTER

10/10