HN user
Why does 9/11 matter so much but not the many far more horrible atrocities that the US regularly supports or commits (and that 9/11 was partly a response to). Clearly some lives are considered worth far more than others.
They do? Like what do you think they swipe left/right based on? It is another very apparent feature..
No it would be heavily criticized to filter based on that, and it often is not that apparent. Men would not be able to ask for it even if they wanted to know. There is also no weight option, which men would like. All of this is because women control the market.
Where? Do you think a Muslim women would prefer a white men over another Muslim? An Indian women (living in India) a white one over another Indian?
In the US, and yeah all women pretty much prefer white men. White men are heavily preferred in india.
Maybe you just don't consider those things misogynistic, because frankly you do sound like one..
Because you consider me pointing out how racist/sexist women can be as misogynistic. It's an easy way to avoid the issues I bring up.
I doubt asian women date white men over other asian ones, but stereotypically asian people can be very racist, except for white people, I agree with you on that.
Asian women raised in the US often strongly prefer white men, you rarely see it the other way around.
For daring to prefer someone with the same skin color as themselves?
For the societal biases and helping to fix them. You're clearly a complete racist, that is practically the definition of racism. Why would you word it like that unless your a psychopath? Also it's not about skin color, it's about race. Again I even mentioned how women admit to finding ethnic men attractive but still won't date them. Women will even ask for ethnic background for ambiguous looking people and unmatch based on that. This is not comparable to sexual orientation, it's very much about societal issues and you know it. You are disgusting. You fight so much for women's issues but don't care at all about fixing problems like these.
Why don't I see almost any feminists fighting against this? Instead they are some of the most racist and hateful people in my experience.
And the important thing is regardless of the source of her preference, at the end of the day it is a given women's inalienable choice who she finds attractive -- even if it is not "fair".
Sure, but shouldn't they be taking responsibility and criticized heavily on a societal level, I don't see that happening much.
Which is all around the most important
The science simply doesn't back this up. And nowadays, even without covid, most people meet online where the simplest filters (race, height, face) are the most important. Imagine if men used a "breast size" filter, do you see why this is so disturbing?
I'm fairly sure each culture have stereotypes of other cultures; but it is getting better. I'm sorry if you have been the target of such negative stereotypes, it's absolutely not okay, but one should not hold grudges against unknown individuals of that society, because it is the same shit.
There is no stereotype like this about white men, they are considered extremely attractive.
I said a significant percentage of men are misogynistic.
This has not been my experience in general, most men I meet in tech and in the US share your types of beliefs.
Well, how about blaming society instead of the individual? Behind every such woman there is a father and mother who repeatedly told her how bad these "other" people are and to never bring one home, etc. Or even just implicitly meaning that. It takes time to "heal" a society and interracial couples are much more acceptable than even just a decade age.
Even asian women show these biases for only dating white men. A lot of these women are very left-wing, it is not because of their fathers and mothers. They should take responsibility.
How do you know if what women find attractive is a result of societal pressure or freedom? Again, do you think women's extreme racial "preferences" in dating are a result of freedom because men of some races are far less attractive and the women are just serving "an evolutionary goal that the stronger gets to pass their genetic lineup"? How do you know society isn't also influencing many other characteristics? Do you think the average 4'6 Cameroon Pygmy is just as attractive as the average US white guy, or are the Pygmy men just "biologically inferior"?
Based on what?
The fact that you blamed "personality" for all problems.
Depends on country.
Well I'm talking about the West, the US in particular.
generalizing an entire gender based on n=1
It's not n=1, the reason people do it is because it is generally considered socially acceptable.
And a significant percentage of men also share the mindset that women are inferior/object, or other misogynistic shit. Neither should happen.
You really don't realize how many men are not misogynistic, and how much more acceptable it is to make fun of men for their insecurities (like height).
Heh? In another thread I did write that men usually don’t want to have relationship with women of another race (and vice versa). But it is all around true, most cultures look down on interracial relationships — which is said.
This is not true, men are more open in general, and women, especially white women, have the strongest bias. Women will even refuse to date ethnic men they find attractive. There are lots of studies on this although I'd have to dig them up. Also why doesn't this affect white men as much if it's just about opposition to interracial relationships? They are preferred by many ethnic women.
may even serve an evolutionary goal that the stronger gets to pass their genetic lineup.
This explanation can be used to justify a lot of human behavior, including genocide.
It's a general well known trend. You can make a fake account and test it in a few minutes.
Just like in many other animals, female choosy selection is the limiting factor, and the males either prove themselves or might as well die. That's where all this lack of empathy is rooted.
"How about actually having a likable personality, which easily tops all other qualities?"
So do you now agree this statement is obviously false?
Height is just one of the first filters women use, and often the requirement is more strict than just "taller than me". You also have to pass other commons filters. Another very important filter for most women is race, and we're just getting started.
I don't buy that. If we use the example of height alone, the vast majority of women would not date a man shorter than them regardless of whether the man has a "likable personality". https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZbG05ePWRQE
Nearly everyone has physical dealbreakers, and height is a very socially acceptable one that the vast majority of women have. Most women also filter on somewhat less politically correct factors like race. The total hypocrisy when it comes to this topic is considered acceptable since women control the market.
The extreme skew (1 male for every 17 females reproducing) is what's incorrect, not the average man having less reproductive success than the average woman.
What if someone did the same thing to black women? It seems only some "standards" are acceptable.
There was some mating skew no doubt. But that number is total nonsense and the study does not show that.
total lie, they have both stack ranking and forced firing, and it's often passed down to specific managers on small teams. The reviews tend to be mostly political, it's completely corrupt.
It's not just somewhat faster, the difference is often huge. You shouldn't let your personal experiences and anecdotes get in the way of the science here, what you wrote earlier about steroids only aiding recovery for people who put in large amounts of work was ridiculous.
I mean, yes, obviously having trainers helps, but really the basics of a good exercise plan are pretty readily available. As for equipment, really most gyms have enough equipment to get 95% of what most actors achieve.
No it's 100%. What do actors have that can't be done with a gym?
Obviously they have to work very hard at it.
How hard do they really have to work if they are taking powerful steroids? The roids will have large effects even with minimal training.
This is not true. Steroids have huge effects other than recovery, they'll provoke far greater response for the same amount of work.
I can't tell if this post is sarcastic. It doesn't take an expert to figure out what to do to lose weight and gain mass (strength training), and strength training doesn't take long.
At least for tests like the SAT, this is not correct. SES and coaching don't affect SAT scores much. A major reason why elites hate it so much and instead want "wholistic evaluations". Instead the ceiling of the test should be raised.
I don't see what's wrong with suggesting genes are causing the gap. I'm not "dogwhistling" anything, this is the most powerfully supported scientific explanation. Science denialism seems to be extremely common on this forum. Genes definitely cause other gaps like sports gaps (or do you seriously believe that is because of racism in favor of blacks?) and are known to play a huge role in ability. Even if races have equal ability, do you seriously believe the extreme selection process for elite immigration won't affect outcomes?
Can you name a "well-rounded" assessment that doesn't just end up being a measure of privilege?
What do you think explains the difference?
The Asians, at least the ones who come to the US, being a far more elite group in terms of genes for academic success.
Shouldn't come as a surprise, given the types of people admitted and admissions process being a game of lying and cheating.
There are lots of Asians that grow up poor in the US and excel at far higher rates than poor African-Americans. There isn't really much evidence that SES has a large impact on things like SAT scores, I doubt it would affect being able to do well at Harvard (which I've heard is actually very easy once you get in).
I'm saying from the ones that do excel, they do just fine, and far more poor asians excel.
Calling it a dogwhistle is just trolling. The real racism is from people judging based on race instead of ability.
I've seem smart Asian kids from poor public schools do far better than the wealthy corrupt kids. It's not about "poor education".
Why is it a handicap? I've seen poor Asians who go to the same types of schools tend to do just fine.
All true, still doesn't excuse the Uyghur stuff.