HN user
The author is assuming that universities want to rein in the costs in the first place. Universities are a business, and just like any other business, why would they want to make as little money as possible? Their main goal is to give students an education, while also making as much money as possible.
Though I like the fact that caffeine helps your body heals better, and that, in turn, helps limit the damage of chronic stress, I don't like the fact that caffeine has also been linked to impotence.
Basically, the theory is that somebody like Bruce Jenner, actually has the mind of a woman, but born inside the body of a man.
More specifically, the theory is that, a normal man has a male mind inside a male body. A normal woman has a female mind inside a female body. But, somebody like Bruce Jenner, has a female mind inside a male body. The other cases are a male mind inside a female body, and a neutral mind inside a male or female body (aka, agender).
This has huge implications. It means that your mind and body are two separate entities, biologically, and not a single entity. They work together most of the times, but at times, your body will fight your mind, as drug addicts will tell you. The mind wants to be clean, but the body craves the effects of the drugs, the body fights the mind, and eventually, the mind lose, and the body compels you to take the drug.
This also implies that gender is not a social construct, but rather gender is biological. If your mind was born female into a male body, no matter what society teaches you, you will always know that you're female. Deep in yourself, you'll always identified as female, even though your body is male.
I've found that the biggest problem preventing people from developing critical thinking skills is cognitive dissonance.
Even when they're smart people, who can read and write, and can comprehend pretty complex models, they all seem to have some kind of cognitive dissonance that prevents them from seeing literally what's in front of them.
Well, actually, there are.
In Japan, if you have disgrace yourself and bring shame upon your family, you have to kill yourself. If you don't kill yourself, honor can not be restore to your family.
This means that when your wife goes grocery shopping, people will not sell her food.
When your children goes to school, teachers will talk down on your children. Students will bully your children. Neighbors will assault your children.
At work, all the women will call your wife a slut behind her back, but making sure it's loud enough for her to hear it. Your wife's boss will make sexual advances toward your wife because she is now no longer a respectable woman.
You clan members will disown your father and make fun of him for birthing such a disgraceful son.
When disown by a clan, you and your family can no longer go to them for support in any form (financial, emotional, social, etc).
Police will purposely pulled you over and give your a ticket.
You son will not be able to get a job because no one will want to hire him. No one want to associate with a disgraceful person like him.
All these societal pressures will not stop until you kill yourself and bring honor back to your family's name.
So yes, you have to kill yourself, if you don't want your family to suffer.
Well, rape culture is a huge problem on campus these days.
Also, just look at ISIS. Whenever they conquered a new place, they rape and sold all the women/girls into slavery. You seriously don't think rape exist anymore?
An apology is not enough to save a marriage.
No one gains anything from these 44 year long sentences.
He attempted to murder a police officer, so why should benefit anything from it?
He's been incapacitated for his entire life, and because of that, is seemingly going to be it for the rest of his life.
Of course. That's the point. That's the whole point of what a punishment is. You can't punish if you don't punish.
I understand. You don't want to punish criminals. You want to teach them how to become good. The thing about criminals is that they have no respect for nice people. So when nice peoples try to teach criminals to become good, the criminal feels like, "Why is this weak ass person trying to lecture me? I would break his neck if I am not in these chains. Talking as if he's holier than me."
Okay. You might say, "Well, if a criminal won't listen to a nice person, let's just have someone not nice teach a criminal how to become good."
Asshole: "Hey criminal, you need to be a good person." Criminal: "Fucking asshole, I'll break your neck."
Not gonna work either.
However, organized crime have found a way to do it (does not work guarantee to work 100% of the time).
The Boss: "Lowly criminal, I need you to be a good boy and not try to kill my family."
Lowly Criminal A: "No." The Boss's 30 henchmen kills him. Lowly Criminal B: "Okay. Fine. I will not try to kill your family."
Only death can deter a criminal, and that's not even guarantee to work 100% of the time (criminals back stabs their boss).
Anyway, as you can see, the above is even worst than our prison system.
However, if you feel you have a method of installing goodness into criminals, please feel free to share.
They don't act in their own self interests.
Actually, they do. For example, when a criminal steals, he's acting purely in his own interest. He doensn't care about anyone else's interests. He doesn't care about his victim's interest. He only care about his own interest. Which is why he steals. For his own self interest.
The problem is, society also has it's own interest. And it's in the best interest of society to jail the thief.
Anyway, I think you meant to say that criminal doesn't think about the consequences of their actions. Again, because everything criminals do are for their own self interest. Even doing something stupid like drugs, is for their own self interest (in this case, he does it because his interest is to feel high).
they clearly aren't rational or else they'd realize a few thousand a week isn't worth life in prison.
Actually, they are pretty rational. You can't say no to the boss. You say no to the boss, you die. So they either deliver that drug, or die. They choose to deliver the drug, even if it means getting caught and doing life in prison. That's better than the boss killing you for not delivering the drug.
The criminals shooting at each other weekly...
Again, they're not being irrational here. If you don't shoot, the other guy will shoot you. You either shoot, or you die because the other guy shoots you.
In fact, cockroaches are even cheaper! See, the way to do it is to feed cockroaches, and only cockroaches to chicken. Then, when the chicken gets really fat (full of cockroaches protein!), you kill the chicken, give the food to human to eat. All those juice from the cockroaches.
OK. I just threw up.
On the other hand, if you come to my company, and every decision you make, you make because of a person's specific gender, then that's sexist, and I would no hire you either.
All workers need to be treated the same (aka, professionally) no matter the gender. I don't need my workers to go around making decision based on whether the other work is male or female. That's sexist.
People need to stop treating people differently base on their gender, and need to start treating all people the same, no matter their gender. When you do something because of a specific gender, that's sexism.
Is this from a book. I would love to read it.
Reminds of me the series Connections, where, no one man invented/created/discovered something all by himself. It was more of like, the thing of one man lead to this other thing of this other man, while this third man over here is also doing this other thing, and then bam! Something new and revolutionary that changed mankind for ever. Pete and repeats.
Unfortunately, the fact that he is a psychopathic serial killer means that he's most likely faking it. It doesn't mean that Multiple Personality Disorder isn't real. It just means that he's just using Multiple Personality Disorder as an excuse.
So if you hear only a single voice in your head, then you're normal. It's called being normal.
If you hear your voice, AND other voices that do NOT belong to you, in your head, BUT, they can NOT control your body, then it's called Schizophrenia.
And if you hear your voice, and hear other voices that do NOT belong to you, and these voices can sometimes take control your body from you, then it's called Multiple Personalities Disorder.
This begs the question. Doctors keep saying the voices that Schizophrenia hear are not real. Yet, they themselves know that the voices they hear are real. As real as their own voice in their head. As real as the voice you and I hear in our head. The only thing is, the voices they hear, they know does not belong to them.
In other word, Schizo has some kind of brain defects where instead of the brain creating only a single voice, a single entity, the brain creates multiple voices. So those voices Schizo hear are not hallucinations, but rather, real voices like your voice in your head right now. Only problem is, those voices has no control over the body, unlike your voice.
However, if a defect happen, where the voices can temporary take over the body, then maybe that's what Multiple Personality Disorder is.
This also make sense why she becomes blind. She takes control of her body, but they take control of her vision.
Well, if Multiple Personality Disorder is real, then that means there's another person/personality/talking voice living inside your brain. And if that other person/personality/talking, who isn't you, takes over the area of your brain involve in sight, OR, if that person/personality/talking voice resides in the area in the brain involves in sight, and you/your personality/your talking voice do not reside in sight area of the brain, it would make sense that you will not be able to see, and only the personality residing in the sight area of the brain can see. OR... The personality/those other beings living inside you decide not to share the vision are of the brain with you, then your area of the brain would not be able to receive the visual information, and thus, you would be blind, but that other personality would not be.
Which personality is the real person?
Well, that's easy. Your preference for the color blue is the real you. Your preference for big boobs is not you. The preference for big boobs is your gene's preference, not your personality's preference. Your short temper-ness, your aggressiveness, that's your genes, it's NOT the real you. Your liking computers, that's the real you. Your curiosity about computers and wanting-ness of the computer, that's your genes, not you. You wanting to do something great with a computer. That's your genes. The greatness that you created with a computer. That's the embodiment of you. Your preference for fighting people. That's your genes. Your niceness. That's the real you, the real personality of you, the you that is not controlled by the genes.
So you see, it's pretty easy to tell which part of you is controlled by the genes, and which part of you is the real you.
What? What do you mean it's hard to tell the difference? What do you mean you need me to explain it more? LOL.
If I build a ladder for short people, am I insulting tall people? Am I ignoring them? Am I reducing them to a number?
The problem is that, you're not just building a ladder. You're purposely not hiring the tall peoples. Instead, you purposely hire the short people, because you perceived the short people to have a disadvantage in height. Then after you hired them, you build each and everyone of them a ladder, to make them as tall the the tall people in the first place, who, you could have hired in the first place, and wouldn't have needed the ladder in the first place if you hired the tall peoples in the first place. And not only that, the short people understands that this job require reaching high places, so most of them have already decided to go for another job, a job that they love that doesn't required them to reach high places with their hands. And then you're wondering, why don't short people comes for hire? I must enforce quote and force all jobs that require tall peoples to hire short peoples, instead of just letting things fall where they fall, naturally.
How many potentially brilliant female computer scientists are we missing out on as a society because our media and culture barrages them with images of male programmers?
Something very wrong with this. Why do those potentially brilliant computer scientist have to be female? Why can't they be male? Are you saying that males are not as brilliant as females? In fact, why does the gender of those potentially brilliant scientists even matter? As long as those scientists are brilliant, why does their gender matter?
You can't just have boys who have never thought about what colonialism actually feels like
And now, you're just assuming that white boys have no empathy. Wow.
Proper affirmative action requires you to get in and take responsibility for your recruitment process and the social issues surrounding it...
If everybody just stop fighting, there would be world peace. BUT, the reality is, not everybody will stop fighting. And there is nothing we can do to change that. We can make fighting illegal. BUT, nothing can change the reality. The reality is, people will still fight.
Proper affirmative action requires you to get in and take responsibility for your recruitment process and the social issues surrounding it...
I know of a way to solve the economic problem we're facing. If we just make all CEOs of all companies competent...
Proper affirmative action requires you to get in and take responsibility for your recruitment process and the social issues surrounding it
You may be responsibility in your recruitment process, but that doesn't mean others will be.
But if everybody just be more responsible in their recruitment process...
Again, if the world just stop fighting wars, there would be no wars.
But really, I don't see how that is an implementable solution. How are you going to implement something like that? How are you going to implement "world-stop-fighting-wars"? How are you going to implement "everyone-is-more-responsible-when-recruiting"?
It's a type of group think. BUT, it is NOT a type of bullying. Bullying requires that people shame/harass/doxx the op. Which they do not.
Compare to the universities, where students bullies other administrators to fire other administrators for defending freedom of speech.
It's the classic witch hunt mob.
Girl A: I like apples. Girl B: I don't like what you're saying. Hey everybody, she's a witch!
Mob deals out punishment.
You can clearly see that the mob is being played, being used like a pawn, by Girl B. The mob doesn't actually benefit form this. Girl B benefits from this because she got rid of her competitor.
The same way those students protesting are being used by the person at the top. The students don't actually benefits. Meanwhile, the person calling the mob to action is actually the person that benefits (law suit settlement, patronage, donations, government funding, etc).
"Traditional masculinity" is the kind of masculinity that have enabled humanity to survived for millions of years.
It includes traits such as:
- Protecting women and children - Not crying when a tiger attack - Attacking the tiger instead, and to do so, requires - Forming a group of hunters, to go and kill that tiger, aka leadership - This also requires some amount of muscles, and aggression - because you can't kill a tiger with love and passivity - Declaring war on other men who want to rape your wife and daughter - Not wanting to, but having to fight wars against other group of men who want to rape your wife and daughter - Letting your son fight, and practice fighting with friend, so that they can defend themselves against enemies, who want to rape your wife and daughters, and... tigers, who wants to eat your wife and daughters - Also, if a tiger attacks, the brother has to save the sister, and if necessary, sacrifices himself to make sure the sister survives - Most important of all, a guy must be able to acquire resources in some form (food, woods, money, cows, etc) to provide for his family (without complaining, whining, crying, or any other emo bullshit that doesn't help him in his goal of acquiring resources) - etc. etc.
You know. The traditional traits that a woman look for in a man. Obviously, as we have found out, these traits are bullshit and toxic and men MUST get rid of these traits that helped humanity survived for millions of years, because, like they said, they're all toxic.
I don't see how getting an administrator, who support a women's right to freedom of speech, freedom of expression (the ability to wear a nurse outfit for Halloween, the ability to wear a Native American outfit for Halloween, since she loves Native Americans). I don't see how getting an administrator, who support a women's right to freedom of speech and freedom of expression, fired is going to help women become less oppressed.
If you're a CEO and you're purposely creating a toxic work environment by continuously saying racist things to your workers, then obviously, you deserve to get fired.
But hell no you should not deserve to get fired for donating to the Republican Party. You have the right to donate to whichever LEGAL organization you want.
He has the right to no like gay people. Just like you have to right to not like [insert whatever it is that you don't like]
As long as he don't act out on it, and go around killing gay people or something.
Just like you have the right to not like George Bush, or football jocks, or goths, or whatever. Nothing wrong with that. As long as you don't try to assassinate George Bush, you have the right to not like him.
I mean, sure, not liking gays make him a homophobic, but as long as he don't continuously go around calling all gays "Faggot" to their faces, harassing them, threatening them, etc.
I think the answer is that everyone is scared to confront them.
Yep. They're winning because people are too afraid to confront them. And people are too afraid to confront them because this is what happens when you confront them...
At Work: They complained to HR that you sexually harass them. You get fired.
As an Administrator at Universities, Schools: They accused you of being racist, and you get fired.
As a Student at Campus: They and their 100 mob of students surround you. They are clearly angry. 100 people. Surrounded you. Angry. Anything goes. You will obviously have to apologize for having a different view than them, if you want to get out of there in one piece.
Online: They accuse you of doxxing them. The mods bans you.
And so on and so on...
Because everybody is too afraid to confront them.
There's so many fields out there, so why should ALL women goes into tech?
You may say, "But why doesn't more women goes into tech?"
Well, let me ask this then, "So 80% of women goes into nursing. Why don't MORE women goes into nursing? Why not 90%? Why not 97.2% Or heck, why NOT less women? Why not some other arbitrary number?"
There are many fields out there. Each fields has it's own arbitrary number of men and women working in it. Why must a specific field have a specific quota of women?
You would say, "Because there's not enough women in tech."
And I would say, "Why is that not enough? What would be consider enough for women in tech? For women in other fields? For women in each and every fields? Why must there be 50% women and 50% men in tech? Why must there be 50% women and 50% men in any field? In every fields? How can there even possible be 50% men and 50% women in all fields?"
So you see, when you really start thinking about it, all these quotas just become nonsensical. In fact, I remember in history, a form of government where the government enforced quotas. And it's call Communism.