Martin Sewell

Started by Peter, Dec 07, 2007, 12:52 PM

previous topic - next topic
Go Down

Peter

Dec 07, 2007, 12:52 PM Last Edit: Dec 08, 2007, 01:31 AM by Peter
BM-NByw7VE2PwjfTtsVdeE5ipuqx1AqkEv1

dr e

This is some excellent material.  Many thanks Peter.

I read throught the section on feminism.  Here's an excerpt:
Quote

How did feminism evolve?

In all species, the relative investment that is made by the male and the female in their offspring determines the degree of discrimination exercised by the individual in selecting a partner. In humans, like many mammals and most animals, females can be expected to be the more discriminating in their choice of mates. Therefore females limit the reproductive success of males and men compete with other men for access to women. Males form a dominance hierarchy. A cognitive mechanism known as cheater detection (Cosmides 1989) evolved to police tactical subversion of the dominance hierarchy, i.e. keep lower ranked men 'in their place' (Mealey, Daood and Krage 1996). Females seek only a minority of males at the top. The upshot of this is that women have an inherent prejudice towards most men. Misandry (hatred of men) is a common prejudice of women and not just feminists, but it is such misandry that led to feminism and the invention of 'misogyny' which is a myth used to excuse their misandry.


Interesting stuff.
Contact dr e  Lifeboats for the ladies and children, icy waters for the men.  Women have rights and men have responsibilties.

Garak

Um Dr E, isn't the section you quoted a generalization? That all women practice misandry, not just feminists and doesn't it hint to the fact that this is in a womans nature? If so, then why did I get warned yesterday for saying the same thing (only I said most, not all)?
I will stop staring at your boobs when you stop staring at my paycheck!

The Invisible Male

The author does provide some good food for thought, but I don't see how mysogyny is a myth.  Both genders are certainly capable of harboring a blind hatred of the other gender, but only one of them is socially acceptable.
The Invisible Man is an 1897 sci-fi novella by H.G. Wells.  The protagonist cannot become visible again, becoming mentally unstable as a result.

dr e


Um Dr E, isn't the section you quoted a generalization? That all women practice misandry, not just feminists and doesn't it hint to the fact that this is in a womans nature? If so, then why did I get warned yesterday for saying the same thing (only I said most, not all)?


I strongly suggest you mind your own business and leave the moderating to the moderators. 
Contact dr e  Lifeboats for the ladies and children, icy waters for the men.  Women have rights and men have responsibilties.

CaptDMO

Rule #1 don't criticize ones host.
Pffft.




Um Dr E, isn't the section you quoted a generalization? That all women practice misandry, not just feminists and doesn't it hint to the fact that this is in a womans nature? If so, then why did I get warned yesterday for saying the same thing (only I said most, not all)?


I strongly suggest you mind your own business and leave the moderating to the moderators. 

Direct question-non-answer
That's one



I wrote up counters to her numbers but meh, not worth it. Hypocrisy, thy name is modern women.


That's a warning for you.
For WHAT exactly?

That's two.

Just sayin'
You can respond properly, or just "flip the switch"-so popular at Radical feminist and disingenuous liberal websites-

Sure, you're the host!
Is it going to be a McElroy- "break the mirror and go home"?
Maybe a LaSalle- "Flashy money ads and select "news" (bwa ha ha ha) contributers?
Perhaps a Deuche-ban critics holding embarrassing  contra-positions?
Consider a Marcotte- fingers in ears-"I can't hear you-la la la la la la la la la la la...."
What's it gonna' be?
 
Up to you Dr. Evil, I just need to know!

dr e

If you have a question DMO you had best make it clear.  If you have a question about the moderating you are free to pm me.
Contact dr e  Lifeboats for the ladies and children, icy waters for the men.  Women have rights and men have responsibilties.

dr e

Okay, I was tired last night.  For those of you who need an explanation for this here it is:

Saying "Hypocrisy, thy name is modern women" is, in my mind, the same as saying women are hypocrites.  If a radfem were to come to this board and say that men were hypocrites I would surely give them a warning.  If someone here does the same they will also get a warning.  Generalizing about either sex in a negative manner is against the rules.  It semed so simple and straight forward to me that I thought it needed no explanation.  So there you go.

Don't like it?  Find another board.  Want to keep posting that sort of thing?  You will be gone. 
Contact dr e  Lifeboats for the ladies and children, icy waters for the men.  Women have rights and men have responsibilties.

CaptDMO

#8
Dec 08, 2007, 06:23 AM Last Edit: Dec 08, 2007, 06:26 AM by CaptDMO
Explanation clarified,
Fair 'nuff!

FP

I was going to put a "(most)" before that line but the original is pretty much my attitude these days. Just to be honest. Most people are hypocrites to some degree but more and more, as much as I try to not be cynical and fair minded, I meet more and more women who spout off crap that would have me shamed and proverbially "run out on a rail" if I dared say it about them. I spent Thanksgiving with a gal who was of the opinion that "many men can't seem to handle a woman who thinks for herself". She then went on to be a rather opinionated and overly competitve combative person the rest of the night. A smart lady with 3 degrees, including a JD and a job as a DA (lawyer) and she couldn't see what the real problem might be and it wasn't all because she was from a "ultra competitive family with a nutso mother".

Garak


Okay, I was tired last night.  For those of you who need an explanation for this here it is:

Saying "Hypocrisy, thy name is modern women" is, in my mind, the same as saying women are hypocrites.  If a radfem were to come to this board and say that men were hypocrites I would surely give them a warning.  If someone here does the same they will also get a warning.  Generalizing about either sex in a negative manner is against the rules.  It semed so simple and straight forward to me that I thought it needed no explanation.  So there you go.

Don't like it?  Find another board.  Want to keep posting that sort of thing?  You will be gone. 

Ok, but what you quoted (and called interesting) was also a negative generalization and spoke to the nature of women.


Obviously you see a difference between what you quoted and what I got warned for 2 days ago. I would appreciate it if you could explain that difference to me, perhaps if I understood your way of thinking I could say what I need to say without generating a warning.
I will stop staring at your boobs when you stop staring at my paycheck!

dr e

Okay P4, I want you to go back and read again what  I quoted and then read the explanation above and let me know via pm if you can see the difference.   Otherwise this issue is dropped and let's get this thread back to the important topic of Sewell and his writing.
Contact dr e  Lifeboats for the ladies and children, icy waters for the men.  Women have rights and men have responsibilties.

Libertariandadd

http://academia.martinsewell.com/
Quote
Feminism
A disproportionate number of female (and even male) academics subscribe to feminism. This is unfortunate, as feminism is unscientific, internally inconsistent and harmful: it is worse than a pseudoscience, it is an anti-science (Sewell 2007a). The—often well meaning—academic left let egalitarianism and feminism run through research like a cancer, which leads to crank science.

This is the greatest irony and has had far reaching consequences. It might be considered the main reason that the Supreme Court hasnt stricken down many of the feminist statutes ratified for the past 20 years. Therefore its important to call the universities to task and demand they rescind all courses that are based upon Junk Science.
'It was always the women, and above all the young ones, who were the most bigoted adherents of the Party, the swallowers of slogans, the amateur spies and nosers-out of unorthodoxy.' George Orwell, Nineteen Eighty-Four

Virtue

WHOA ~!!! I have reading material for the foreseeable future now !  This is GREAT stuff!
Imagine waking up tomorrow to find
that unbelievably rape is now legal.

You would be freaking out, telling everyone you ran into this is crazy- something needs to be done... now!!! And then every man you told this to just very smugly and condescendingly says...

"Hey... not all men are 'like that.'"

John Dias


http://academia.martinsewell.com/
Quote
Feminism
A disproportionate number of female (and even male) academics subscribe to feminism. This is unfortunate, as feminism is unscientific, internally inconsistent and harmful: it is worse than a pseudoscience, it is an anti-science (Sewell 2007a). The--often well meaning--academic left let egalitarianism and feminism run through research like a cancer, which leads to crank science.

This is the greatest irony and has had far reaching consequences. It might be considered the main reason that the Supreme Court hasnt stricken down many of the feminist statutes ratified for the past 20 years. Therefore its important to call the universities to task and demand they rescind all courses that are based upon Junk Science.


Calling universities and asking them to rescind all courses that are based upon Junk Science would probably result in all courses based upon sound science being rescinded.  What constitutes Junk Science is the issue, and it is either a question of fact or a question of opinion.  Without being armed with credible sources of refutation, you place your request at the mercy of the political judgments of non-academic actors -- ideologues in this case.  Instead, what you should do is uncover published scholarly reviews that criticize the fundamental assumptions of such programs.  There are credible researchers out there that have stuck their necks out and subjected pseudo-science to academic rigor, and found the ideologues lacking.  Such criticism needs to be repeated to decisionmakers.  I have noticed that you need not be an expert on a subject; all you need to do is closely examine one or two studies and cite them during your dialogue.  This establishes credibility, rather than the other scenario in which you would be classified as an ideologue yourself.

Go Up