Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Topics - ThePatriarch

Main / Misandry in science.
Jun 10, 2007, 03:12 PM

This is the blog of a feminist, and the content might shock you:

Here is what piss me off:

If we have to believe feminists there is lots of hidden sexism against women in science.

However, it might be much easier to look at signs of sexism that aren't hidden:

Prizes in science that exclude males.
Giving priority to females in science.
Lots of talk of equality in the mainstream, but each time we learn that some animals are more equals than others.
People like Lawrence summers who are being fired for trying to bring any scientific debate using data instead of angry denial regarding to the issue of sex and science.

I suppose physicists will have to face anti-male bashing all their lives because this is a field where a 50/50 ratio isn't possible without a great cost of efficiency.  So they will have to apologize over and over again for not being able to reach some quotas that would satisfy the narrow-minded resentment of some angry feminists, who write a lot about women and science, but who as women don't write about science!

That's all,  I guess I just need to vent.  Everywhere I go, I see prizes, money, scholarships reserved for women.

What happened to meritocracy? Are all universities into denial? Will I have to put my head in the sand too to avoid the angry mob? The cost of being an iconoclast is great.

I saw this at Andrew Sullivan website.

Two points of the article: Compulsive schooling at 4? Seems like the new father is the state.

Second points, stuff in the name of respecting minorities is usually bullshit. (It replaces human rights with special privilege and remove much freedom)
Main / Antifeminism, definition
Feb 03, 2007, 05:16 AM

Please try to provide a neutral definition to antifeminism. (Remove all values)

Here is mine:

Antifeminism: Standing in opposition to feminism.

(I think it is quite good, since most Anti-XXX just mean that) When XXX is a political group.

I have the impression the dictionary definition allowed feminists to define anti-feminism.
Main / Bad science
Nov 28, 2006, 01:14 PM
Over the last days, I have been browsing around Beyond Belief 2006.  It is a conference on religion and science.

Some of the topics might be relevant for this forum.

My main problem is that so many people get bogus diplomas or perhaps that people with legitimate diplomas make completely irrational claims.

An example is Stuart Hameroff who claimed that "Platonic values are found at Plank scale within quantum geometry".  That reminds me of Sokal's hoax more than anything.

But more specifically:

Joan Roughgarden who is against darwinian evolution for purely ideological reasons (feminism).

or Mahzarin Banaji who talked about how it is progress that people are no longer feeling well to discuss differences in sex or race.  In other world, when there is taboo, guilt, and people are no longer able to talk, we have accomplished something great.

Check out her entry here:

I see an ideological field with an ideological goal.

(I can say the same about Sam Harris who only opens his mouth to commit the naturalistic fallacy)
Main / 16volts
Sep 25, 2006, 12:00 AM

This blogger identity was discovered, he is a college professor in canada.
Watch how he is reacting.

This is a parody by another blogger.

More information at

This reminds me of 1984.

The goal isn't just to punish dissent, you must make the revolutionary tell everyone that he is wrong, that the party was right all along and he must mean it, else you create a martyr.  Then of course, the party will shoot you in the head.

Just like it did for Lawrence Summers.

'There are three stages in your reintegration,' said O'Brien. 'There is learning, there is understanding, and there is acceptance. It is time for you to enter upon the second stage.'

Diversity training will do the job.

He accepted everything. The past was alterable. The past never had been altered. Oceania was at war with Eastasia.

Anything could be true. The so-called laws of Nature were nonsense. The law of gravity was nonsense.

Do not believe your lying eyes.

"I understand how: I do not understand why"? It was when you thought about "why" that you doubted your own sanity.

I do not understand the "why" either.  Why are feminists acting like that? Money? Power? Ego?
Main / A model
Aug 10, 2006, 11:19 AM
Here is the problem:

You are in charge of a firefighting hiring department.  There is no PC laws.

You want only the strongest.

You just got data for 10 000 people.  (5000 males; 5000 females) You need to select 100 firefigthers.  You only have the ressources to evaluate 1000 people.  You first have to do a preselection, using the 3 information: Sex, Weight, Height. (Everyone is young)

Suppose that to select the 1000 people, you have to select an height and weight requirement for males, and an height and weight requirement for females... How do you quantify the requirements?

How many males and females will be selected for the 1000 people that will be evaluated for the strength test?

The strength test will be a Bench-Press 1 rep test.

How many males and females do you expect among the 100 firefighters selected?

9000 people couldn't be evaluated, how many would have been able to make it in the top 100?

I need help for this problem.  Anyone want to work on it with me?
Main / I would like to find a feminist forum.
Aug 07, 2006, 07:12 PM
I'm interested in finding a feminist forum.  Anyone know a forum where I will not get banned for asking questions or for raising objections?

(Also, I would like a place where I won't get too many personnal attacks)
Main / Two animations on abortion
Jul 29, 2006, 05:17 PM
Two animations

Topic: Abortion (humoristic)

Topic: Genetical Engineering, abortion (serious)
Main / Solving the height gap
Jul 28, 2006, 09:17 AM
I was looking at statistics of heights in lots of countries.  I realised that women were shorter than men.  I couldn't believe it, I thought it was only a stereotype.

Then, I decided to apply feminist logic.  If males are taller than females, it must be because of discrimination.  I think, it is easy to support this position in several way, since height is linked to alimentation for exemple.  It is easy to imagine that the patriarchy is preventing women from eating correctly.  And the gap is even there in so called western countries!

Also height is correlated to social status and longevity.  It is time to talk about unfair height privilege.  (And women are the most disadvantaged).

I hope many other people here will want to join me in the fight against this gap.  Because whenever there is a gap, there is discrimination.  And people who talk about innate biological differences are just using this as justification to continue oppressing short people. (Even if they aren't very political)

It is time to apply affirmative action in matters of height!

In australia, males are 15 cm taller than females. SHAME on you australia.
In spain, the gap is only around 10 cm.  I hope we can use spain system to end this oppression.  But in the name of diversity, I think it would be better if everyone was the same size.

Less privileged women were unenthused:

"'It makes me sick,' said Mary Higgins, an administrative assistant at UCSF and statewide president of UC's clerical union, which did not get a raise this year. 'It is a violation of the public trust and it is just more of the same.'"

Women aren't helped by feminism.  The only winners are the feminists. Everyone else is losing. And our first loss is truth and academic freedom.

Do we really want women that sound like men?
Has the new men voice became more high pitched?

Of course, something that far in the future shouldn't be taken as a definite and precise prediction.

One thing I wonder for exemple, while values are partially heritable, is there a regression to the mean taken into account?  What about conversions from one group to the other?

Steve Sailer predicted the "return of the patriarchy"

In the end, mother nature doesn't care about what is good, but what is efficient.
Main / Dealing with bullies
May 10, 2006, 08:27 PM
Here, I would like to know about the strategies to use when talking with people who use vicious personnal attacks, intimidation when arguing about any kind of topics, and all other kinds of dishonest methods,  false dichotomies for exemple, if you are not a feminist, then you must hate females.

Is it useful to debate these kinds of people?
Is there any possible ways to bring the debate back to something rational?

Also with their intimidation, people might feel alienated, and afraid to discuss important issues, for fear of insults, the social exclusion and the harassment.

When they do it, it is their righteous wrath, when their opponents do it, it is pure evil.  Double standards as usual.

And look at her definition of freespeech:

It is freespeech to remove the freedom of expression of others, if you feel rigtheous outrage.

So ideas that offend cannot be expressed.  Or rather ideas that offend feminists cannot be expressed.

A very new definition of freespeech, similar to the cartoon crisis.
Main / Titanic and chivalry.
Apr 12, 2006, 09:41 AM
For those interested, there is a post right now at about the above topic.  (By the way, I recommand highly that blog)

What is interesting is that feminists will never concede inferiority in a field over men and they will also never concede that men can do something very positive for women.
This is an exemple of extreme political correctness.

It shows a world that is not:
Main / Schools for boys.
Mar 26, 2006, 09:45 PM
Let us suppose that you are the principal of a school for boys only.  Or that you are the principal of school for boys and girls but with some segregated classes.  What would you change (compared to present day mixed education) to help the boys perform?

Here is some of the thing I would change:

Shorter classes, because little boys don't have a high attention span.
More maths and science, boys perform well in these domains, and they as a group like the topics.
Some optional chess classes, boys perform well at chess.
More sports, lots of it.
Logic courses.
Latin courses, latin is a logical language, so I guess the male brain might enjoy it.
Remove homework, and add extra school hours. (Maybe adding school on saturday)  One reason boys don't perform as well as girls is that they don't do their homework with the same frequency, if at all.

No group work, boys are competitive.

Remove all muticulturalism/tolerance/morality/religion classes.
Make art courses optional.

Of course, we are all unique, but I described my ideal school.
Main / V is for Vendetta
Mar 20, 2006, 08:08 AM
I went to see the movie last night.  I was expecting lots of violence and little to no scenario.

Here is the story:

It begins with a christian fundamentalist on TV talking against homosexuals and muslims in London.

After this, we learn that London is now a police state.  An elected conservative prime minister is now a Chancellor (Like National Socialist German Worker Party Chancellor Hitler?)

On TV, we see terrorists abusing a blond women at some point in the movie.  Everyone is watching the TV like mindless sheeps.  (Maybe a mirror of everyone watching this movie).

And we learn that the real terrorists are the people of the government.

One of the main character is an homosexual that is persecuted.  Worse, he is found with a copy of the Koran so he is executed.  (He likes reading the Koran for the poetry)

(In Islamist countries, how are the rights for homosexuals? for women? for atheists? for jews?)

The homosexual also have a flag showing the "Coalition of the willing" It is a composite of the London Jack, the U.S's flag and the National Socialist's flag.

We are also shown the story of a lesbian who is executed by the state.  They are poor oppressed victims.

At some point there is of course a catholic bishop who is of course into pedophilia.

So finally a cute chick is held captive by a terrorist, until she is willing to get herself killed in the revolution.  And we see image of how noble terrorism is, when we attack a government of white christians.

Needless to say, the story end with the United Kingsdom's government's buildings are exploding.  And everyone is wearing a mask showing the same face and sharing the same glorious thoughts. (In the name of diversity, everyone look alike and share the same thoughts)

Oh well, next time, I think I'll prefer seeing a porn movie, the story will be better, and lesbians won't whine about being victims.