Hopefully they are told how safe it is on the way to the hospital
Incel has never meant "involuntary celibate". It has always meant "someone I disagree with". The rest is smoke
Jeebuz dude, https://ancillary-proxy.atarimworker.io?url=https%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2F... It even has original spelling. INVCEL.
So anyhow, take it up with them, and since I disagree with you, you are officially an incel - by your own admission.
Nah, incel today means nothing at all, since everyone seems to have a singular personal definition they insist is the right one.
Ironically - its first use was by a woman describing her own sexless situation.
Linux desktops don't do any of this "we put AI into everything, no you have to use it" bullshit that Microsoft is pushing upon you.
There is an alternative if you so desire it.
I've said for years that the Windows fans will accept as much bullshit as Microsoft feeds them. Standing by for the people saying how they just have to use Microsoft, nothing else will work.
The problem with this line of reasoning is, ironically, is that it's the same line of reasoning that has caused Microsoft to add their AI shovelware into Windows, and that's this: that Windows is a selection made, by users, explicitly.
It isn't. Microsoft's mindset on this matter is that people actively choose to run Windows because of the value-add that Microsoft implements, while the Linux enthusiasts assume people run Windows because they don't know better.
Well, FWIW, I use Windows, Linux and MacOS. But perhaps Windows only users know a lot more than me and the others who believe it is a piece of crap. I also spend 90 percent of my computer downtime on Windows.
Windows is still as popular as it is because of all the applications on it. That's it.
Awesome - then they will serve as amusement, and verification that the fans will do whatever Microsoft say they will do, and put up with it. I can hardly wait until it is a SaaS. Will you pay whatever Microsoft decides you will pay? Let say - if they say you'll pay 150 dollars a month, You'll do it. 500?
The idea that people want all the program available is interesting. How many people have them all? The usual argument is that people are on Windows because they have to be on Windows, because of Office 365. Just a few programs where they have no choice.
So really, I don't care a lot, I just watch Windows users as entertainment. And I have multi-OS experience.
I am not casting you as anti-trans but your hypothetical of you bearded and hulked out and self identifying as a woman in some fantasy scenario that liberals will graciously offer you a job is a fever dream fantasy. I don't know if you are anti-trans, i dont know you, but that is an anti-trans argument you are presenting.
You show the typical response to anyone not marching in lockstep, If I do not accept every situation the trans community demands, I am anti trans.
The far left is learning from the far right - do not deviate your opinion from what we tell you your opinion is.
That's why conservatives are still talking about the trans swimmer and the same couple examples for years now, because it's a very rare occurrence, this issue is nowhere near as widespread as people believe. This is Matt Walsh saying there are "millions" of kids on puberty blockers when the number is under 1000 per year.
I'm not Matt Walsh - so anyhow here are those same couple examples. The liars here https://ancillary-proxy.atarimworker.io?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwomenssportspolicy.org.... As of September 2024, they’ve logged 5,149 males in women’s sports, and you can sort by sport, level, place, etc.
But since we are into telling people what they present as, you present as a person who is happy to have women being pushed out of sports.
It depends on your outlook doesn't it? Were you just mistaken about the couple examples, or do you want males playing in women's sports. because what women want is irrelevant in their own sports?
There is that biology thing again which is very inconvenient. Males and females are not physiologically identical. This goes beyond giving birth.
Unless chemical intervention is used to prevent normal development, males are in general, stronger, taller, bigger upper body musculature and skeleton features, and are generally more aggressive than women.There are no doubt edge cases, very strong women who can dominate weaker men, but those are the edge cases. Women generally have stamina superiority over men.
And sports are very important for both sexes. Competition, teamwork, learning how to win or lose properly are every bit as important for women as well as men. A pity that so many people think that an issue that many many women care deeply about is completely irrelevant.
Kinda misogynistic if you ask me. The women who complain - are they transphobic, or should they just. leave women's sports for not being woke enough that they won't accept being dominated by men?
Anyhow, we took this about as far as we could, you claim that I present as anti-trans, so I will claim you present as misogynistic and don't care about women. So unless you care to modify your accusation, mine stands equally. You like all the men playing in women's sports, so I was happy to show that there are more than your couple examples that those Republicans keep bringing up. Funny how that works.
Just did a little deeper than the standard talking points that seem so echo chamberish - that's my only suggestion.
They can get their info off the weather channel like everyone else!
Linux desktops don't do any of this "we put AI into everything, no you have to use it" bullshit that Microsoft is pushing upon you.
There is an alternative if you so desire it.
I've said for years that the Windows fans will accept as much bullshit as Microsoft feeds them. Standing by for the people saying how they just have to use Microsoft, nothing else will work.
There may be no imposition that shakes their faith. The shit tests haven't failed so far.
I butchered the formatting. I meant to say to #2 is that trans people are like less than 1% of the population and again, lets be real, the unspoken (or spoken) judgement on trans people is "can you pass". If you can then maybe you dont even notice eh?
Here's some info: https://ancillary-proxy.atarimworker.io?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwilliamsinstitute.law.... The hoopla is out of proportion to the numbers. But..
Trying to cast me as anti-trans, amirite? I have no issues with adults transitioning. I do have issues with children transitioning, as they are often dealing with the confusion of growing up, and adopt a more CIS role as adults, or deciding that rather than change sex, they are just gay.
But if you walk in as you described and say you're a women...
My point is not that anyone should walk into an interview spouting that they are a woman, it is that you can.
And it has been done. It is something that is definitely a problem for biological women, when actual men can do this.
So the push for androgenization makes for issues. Ironic that womanism has worked so hard for equality that they are now making their way back to a tyranny of men, as has been shown in sporting events.
Far left progressives working hard to return to not being progressive, can't make that up.
The first I doubt happens anywhere close to enough to be statically relevant and I have not seen that borne out in any evidence that the people hired were un-qualified (that doesn't mean they were the most qualified, just that they met the job requirements). There's always something else besides those characteristics. That might be a starting point but that's all.
I spent my career in a University environment. I have seen people hired for non merit reasons.
The second is again, mountains from molehills, we are talking about people So who ya gonna hire, Me, or someone you know little about, has a marginal skillset, but check off all the identity politics checkboxes?
Well lets be fucking real here and out on our actual hiring hats and just not meme out.
Have you ever been involved in the hiring process? I have. Certain groups have specific ways to be interviewed, and certain questions are forbidden to be asked. As an example, I was not allowed to ask biological women their marital or family status, because that sounds like I'm checking to see if they are going to take time off to have children. To the point where some women have told me "I know you aren't allowed to ask, but I'm not planning on having any more children." I'm not allowed to ask, but she isn't prohibited from telling me something that she considers a big plus.
Seriously, interviewers have to triple parse every word that comes out of their mouth. That's what real is. I had to be exquisitely sensitive to groups we were trying to increase the numbers employed.
#1 I am going to hire someone I know personally if I can or recommended by someone I trust or another employee. The networking as you said is the most important, you can just skip most of the process if you know the right person so we can already wipe all those hires right off the stats page, the pool we are discussing are the rest outside that group which is larger than we all think.
I still had to go through the interview process. Using my present employment as an example, I went into it with my plan to fix the issues they were having. While I was doing that, they noted my composure, and how it matched up with the psychological needs of the work, as well as the intel they had on me. Sounds ominous, but that's basically what networking provides.
But in the end, they still had to go through their process.
If you come into a job because your skills and reputation proceed you then DEI has fuckall to do with anything.
That is true, I just noted that networking is important, not as a DEI requirement.
Second if I interview both and your resume is fantastic but I think you come off like a smug piece of shit but I have another person who has less skills but a better personality, well, I'll defer to who their direct manager is going to be (that's how most companies also decide, if theyre smart) and make a judgement call but now again, we are down to the subjective.
A lot of people in here think I'm a smug piece of shit. Often that is because I tell people things they do not want to hear. I'm not always right, but I take accountability for my mistakes. Which is pretty rare it might seem.
It depends on the job and the company. If i have 2 perfectly equal people and my office is mostly white folk and I have a person who fits the bill and is a minority, yeah, i might be inclines to choose them instead. Sorry white guy, you'll be OK finding another job.
Of course, perfectly equal isn't quantifiable in these matters, but I have no issues with the coin flip method, or even if I like one or the other better. As a person who believes race is a social construct, skin color is unimportant to me. So in your scenario, if the candidates are perfect in all ways, it will either be a coin flip, or I've occasionally had success talking the powers that be to hire bothgreat candidates.
Literally the same thing they've done about it for the last decade: not a goddamn thing.
What you're describing is exactly what I've gotten out of Microsoft, Comcast, Google, and to a lesser extent other large webmail providers. They do not care about deliverability if you're not signed up with some of their BS partner programs, which are not documented anywhere. If you try, you'll get stuck in bot-hell of generated KB articles that are all fucking wrong.
My favorite is when their articles do a "how to" and the info is outdated. Referring you to things that don't exist any more because Microsoft moves things around arbitrarily and not always logically. Recently had that with a W11 copy for Parallels on MacOS that Windows refused to authenticate even though I had the receipts. Finally had to go scorched earth and reinstall Parallels and the W11
Because we don't actually teach the nasty parts about it. I was not taught about gerrymandering, voter suppression,
Odd, I was taught about all that and more. Slavery, civil war, reconstruction, Jim Crowe, Blacks having fought for this country since pre-reovlultion days
... the reason our Senate exists, why we have winner take off first past the post voting, what the southern strategy is, why Richard Nixon started the drug war,
Now I suspect you are referring not to history but 1960s/70s political radicalism. Very distorted politicized views of history.
Any idiot can pick up enough civics to participate in politics with a 30-second Google search.
No, you confuse understanding civics with a political indoctrination. Political indoctrination can be fast, Actual history and political theory is a far slower process. Hence it having its own class rather than a speech at a rally, or a google search.
What we need to be teaching kids is how the ruling elite manipulate them and our political system and how our political system was built from the ground up to protect wealthy landowners.
We need to teach kids to pay attention to actions, not to talk. The elite are in control only because we vote based on talk. On promises. Not a track record of actual accomplishments. And to be clear, accomplishments are not job titles or offices held, programs supported, etc. They are programs that delivered on their goals, things that got built, things that got fixed, etc. As long as you vote for whoever has the most heart tugging speech you will be playing the elite man's game.
I too was taught both the good parts and the not so good parts. And like you, I was in a conservative town, and this was quite a few years ago.
Civics is basically the rights and obligations of citizens, and not the endless self flagellation some might demand. While there can be historical actions noted for context and used to illustrate when things go astray, those are the basics.
And obviously there is a political element involved because different countries have different rights and obligations. The idea is to produce a stable and working system. Some might think the idea is to produce people who disdain their country, and end it.
Some in here definitely have a deep and abiding hatred for the USA, and would cheer our extinction. The question then becomes what springs up in its place?
And the idea that their toxicity only outlook be taught to our children is tipping their hand. Their version of what US children should be taught is that the US is so evil and wrong headed, it must be cancelled. I do wonder exactly where our antagonist is from. Regardless, watch how my heresy gets modded. My prediction is 30 minutes to -1 troll.
Sure but defining "merit" is something that has some areas of objectivity (education, direct experience) and some that is totally subjective (lived experience, upbringing, social skills). In that lens a "qualified" candidate has a mix of all those the employer wants, and lived experience can be tied to race or social class. All that can also be tied into the current makeup of the company hiring as well.
So objective merit is important, but it isn't everything and it never, ever has been.
It is much easier to hire a person because of some physical characteristic, is it not? If a person is a particular skin color, has a vagina, or identifies as somthing that tick of the checkbox - you just rubber stamp it, and the workplace is now better than if actual ability is a metric.
Since a man is at the moment, a woman if he says he is, the whole system of preferential hiring on non job related metrics means I can identify as a woman, an Ugly - foot a woman - 6 foot tall hairy muscular 250 pound woman. with a beard. And that is a big plus when applying for work in places where that is more important than qualifications for the work.
So objective merit is important, but it isn't everything and it never, ever has been.
There are other aspects that are important. Attitude, ability to work well with others. One of the reasons thatI was hired for my present position is that while wielding authority, I get along very well with others. Which BTW, includes those who fit the DEI checkboxes. I also accept accountability. However, I have a technical skillset that not many have. My skills come with a pretty steep price tag as well.
By the way, that's why networking is very important, despite the common
Good thing you don't handle pr for Ubisoft.
Japan: we think this game series, which has a rep for historical accuracy and cultural sensitivity, is disrespecting us by being inaccurate and for other reasons. Like why can't we have our own protag??? Everyone else got one.
Ubisoft: woops let me fix that for you, almost
Ol Olsoc: nah Japan is just racist
Ubisoft: hey who hired that guy???
I noted that there is a lot of systemic racism in Japan - do you care to deny that? I've given some links. Show how they are incorrect.
There was a race element in what she had to put up with - was this not racist?
One of my links is the deflection element, as in China using images from slavery days, to tell the world that the US should never tell other countries what to do. Do you support what China is doing to Uyghurs and Tibetans?
My point, that seems to bother you, is nothing that racism is not the sole province of the USA. That those folks in Japan who were reeeeeeing over the inclusion of a historical person who did not have the same skin color a most Japanese had a highly racist component. Speaking some truth sometimes bothers people. Looking forward to your discussion on this.
Incel has meant racist since about a week after it was coined.
It means involuntary celibate, can you show me the definition that it means racist? Also, the term femcel - which refers to female incels - is it your contention that they are female racists? The vids I've watched where they self refer, they use that term to note they are not involved in sexual activities.
As I said before, incel is so overused it might as well mean "I don't agree with you".
I certainly do not support the so called "Racist fucks" but cannot ascertain that they are right wing.
ok- I'm generalizing based on a few very fallible points. I'll describe them and let you judge.
There is a problem with left wing racism, in that the left does tend to be outraged if you dare to insinuate that there is a racist component that is systemic in its ideology. https://ancillary-proxy.atarimworker.io?url=https%3A%2F%2Ftheconversation.com%2Fho...
Identity politics - a very deliberate "racial" promotion or demotion based on skin color and origin. Also sex and gender - let's ignore that for the purpose of this discussion, because that would get really complicated really quickly. It is beyond affirmative action, which I can support in limited amounts, gotta be careful there. But yeah, it's there. And since it is a different culture, I've no idea of the politics of the people involved.
The malignant racism (becoming offended and defensive, and later offensive, by a historical fact that flies in the face of your precomputed racial mythology) is distinct from more subtle forms of systemic racism (as I would argue is demonstrated in your first link), whereas the latter is demonstrated by some Japanese folks being very against the idea of calling this person samurai, in spite of the fact that people in similar arrangements in that time period are happily considered thus (including white folks).
They're intellectually dishonest. They know damn well the definition of "samurai" they're using comes from a far later time, and that they're applying it to the relevant time inconsistently to exclude the person they take exception to.
I would certainly agree. And it can be kind of shocking to a whole lot of people when they discover that racism is nothing the so called "white people" have a monopoly over. And yes, Japanese have systemic racism. The Koreans have been their targets as well. https://ancillary-proxy.atarimworker.io?url=https%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2F... What always interests me is the deflection that happens - the world is framed that there is one place where racism exists. And that is the USA. https://ancillary-proxy.atarimworker.io?url=https%3A%2F%2Fthediplomat.com%2F2022%2F0...
The country that specifically targets Tibetans and Uyghurs in the present day, yet if the US speaks of it - a Chinese foreign ministry spokeswoman brandishes a photograph of Black slaves picking cotton in the United States. (From the article)
Or The Chinese deputy ambassador to the U.N. pointed out that the United States’ long history of racism means it cannot “get on a high horse and tell other countries what to do.”
So the takeaway is that the Chinese are allowed to do as they wish, and if the US points it out they shouldn't be allowed - although of course, the hypocrisy is apparently that it is fine business for China to bray all day about us. My point of all of this, is if the presumed systemic racist country of the USA was nuked out of existence today, racism would hardly take a hit. As well as that the very handy concept that only the US is racist, only "white people" can be racist, and it is only a right wing phenomena is not only wrong, but further entrenches racism in countries who can feel good if they just attack us via deflection.
While in your link, they abhor the idea and wish to start a dialog on the matter to help all parties understand each other- a concept so fucking foreign to me as an American that it almost feels fake- but that's what to raised systemic racists when something racist has been brought to your attention is like- you want to fix it- you don't want it to persist.
Many people don't want to understand each other. They get fed a line of bullshit that allows them to exercise hatred of the other. And yes, here in the US there are plenty of people who find solace in self hatred.
The need to hate the "other" is a core competency of humans. Perhaps because of tribalism, and if the target is easily identifiable, that's all the better. But we really gotta work against that.
Is DEI not about hiring unqualified people?
Not necessarily. But it does utilize some identity politics with some people having preference over others, that is not based on merit.
Which is to say, a person that fits the DEI mantra might be the best person for the job. But being the best person for the job isn't as important.
In irony, where I'm at now, there are many women and people of other skin colors. They tend to be quite competent. They were hired on merit.
Syntactic sugar causes cancer of the semicolon. -- Epigrams in Programming, ACM SIGPLAN Sept. 1982
