Comment Re:spectacular ... not (Score 5, Insightful) 67
Either your expectations are too high, or your sense of wonder is too low, to get much out of this. Personally, I loved it.
big eyes, long fingers,big hips, small breasts etc will start to be pinpointed to a single gene, protein or step malfunctioning
Those things are a "malfunction"?
(But not your small dick, right? That's 'normal'...)
To be fair, he never said anything about those demonstrated traits being exhibited by a female of the species. I'd be disconcerted to have small breasts as a male... and possibly excited.
Women on the other hand, are getting pregnant no matter what, unless they very ugly or genetically unable.
Tell that to any number of childless couples, I'm sure the'll love hearing your philosophy (end sarcasm). Not to mention that the problem may lay on the male side, women without children aren't necessarily childless because of something wrong with *them*.
The researchers also found that women were underrepresented at the 2011 congress because men accepted invitations more often than women.
So it's not an ingrained sexism on the behalf of the congress, but according to the next quote based on biological differences:
The most demanding phase of a career in Biology, when it is important to communicate one’s findings, and to build networks with other scientists, coincides with the age at which women's fertility starts to decline, meaning it is their last chance to have a family - unlike men.
Another idiot that doesn't realize the difference between a copy and themself.
Define "self".
"Just think, with VLSI we can have 100 ENIACS on a chip!" -- Alan Perlis
