drz

A minute percentage of abnormal cases will exist in any natural corpus. That doesn't mean it's generalizable to the entire category, or even worthy of any attention at all. For you to claim otherwise is simply intellectually dishonest. In short, no, it doesn't.

With that out of the way, yes, anyone can ignore mean words. Absolutely anyone. If they're very emotionally immature, they might require some coaching first, but that's about it.

No, it doesn't. Teenage boys are bullied physically, not emotionally -- and you can't ignore physical damage the way you can trivially ignore some mean words.

"Many" is a weasel word, and informationally useless. How many of us, and what percentage of us, are the relevant questions.

You keep playing dumb. It's not working for you. It won't ever work for you.

The hypothesis is that the exhibited feeling of incompetence is because men are better than women on average.

How many times will I have to repeat this until you get it?

Yeah, no. Ask a vet suffering from PTSD.

because they are less competent than men, on average.

Not necessarily in comparison to the specific researcher they're talking to. On average.

Reading comprehension is a great skill. You should look into it.

The obvious hypothesis is that women sound less competent when talking to men because they are less competent than men, on average.

They don't sound less competent when talking to women because they aren't less competent than other women, on average.

Playing dumb won't help you win this argument. It will just make you look just as dumb as the researchers.

Yes, and the researchers aren't even considering the possibility that these women sound incompetent when talking to men, because they actually, comparatively, are.

They discount the most obvious explanation without even testing for it, and expect to be taken seriously. What a joke.

Programming is abstract reasoning. Apart from some syntax memorization, there's nothing more to it. Even design patterns are optional, and can be independently discovered.

So you can't deliver on your claim at all.

You can't show any individual program for men, because there is no individual program for men.

You lose by default.

Thanks for your time.

You're not going to do well in computer programming unless you can reason abstractly.

When female scientists talked to other female scientists, they sounded perfectly competent. But when they talked to male colleagues, Mehl and Schmader found that they sounded less competent.

Could it be that they, comparatively, are?

Nah. That would make too much sense.

Let's blame it on the all-powerful patriarchy, which we can't even prove to exist.

That's not insane at all.

Show me these magical affirmative action programs targeting straight white men.

This study is about stereotypes, not interest, not merit, not anything that's actually relevant.

You know what shows interest? A female willingly taking and passing CS courses. Not this bullshit.

You do need individual programs for men as a valid counterpart for individual programs for women. Where are they?

Sure. West Africans are very successful in all forms of running, for example. Are you going to deny this?

No, it isn't. You can't dictate interest.

Show me these magical affirmative action programs targeting straight white men.

None of us here got recruited into the field, and we still found out that it engaged us, didn't we?

The field isn't hidden. It's already exposed to males and females in equivalent amounts.

Men absolutely dominate in the 120+ IQ range, and high IQ is very strongly correlated with abstract reasoning.

Or, you know, leave everyone to their own devices, and let people choose the fields that engage them.

Males and females are not equal, in metabolism, strength, ability, or anything else. They have equal rights, but this does not mean that they deserve equal representation in all fields. Those with the highest merit deserve representation. Trying to fight this simple fact is the height of folly.

Cooking and meal-planning, obviously.

Are you on a paleo-and-wino diet?

Under this system, I'd just eat out for every meal and net a budget of $0/week.

As long as you avoid dented cans (risk of botulism) and strain off the liquid before using the contents (too much salt, risk of high blood pressure and kidney failure), canned foods are perfectly healthy.

Nothing that takes skill-building and effort is practical.

Programming isn't practical, either. And yet, here we are.

The skills and effort pay off.

I bet their lobster wasn't buttered up, though.

I bet you eat less well than this guy.

Eating well means eating nutritionally complete, balanced, and tolerably palatable foods. When you maximize for the taste experience, without concern for nutritional completeness or balance, you are not eating well.

Image search gets you the sauce on any reasonably popular image, so a watermark isn't as critical as you seem to think it is.

If a customer willing to pay for content is really intrigued by your image, he'll find the sauce.