They didn't even have a pole. Just what are they teaching women about how to make money these days?
I expect to be downmodded to the lowest level of turtles, but I think it is the idea of since today, dancing is quite popular, and that if they can get young girls to think that programmers dance all day, they might decide to become programmers.
I mean Beyonce is a programmer right?
The office network probably is not to get work done.
Of course not. The Facebook, porn, and shopping, for the most part. Oh, and cat videos.
Plus, nothing ever got done before the intertoobz. It was impossible.
Lets just air-gap those systems -- unless someone can explain why we need to make a nuclear reactor accessible from the Internet.
So the bean counters and shareholders can check up on them and make sure they are serving them in the cheapest and most profitible way possible?
Then later the IOTs can control your refrigerator and stove for maximum efficiency.
I'm pretty sure you don't understand what the Republican platform really is.
1. Find out what the Democrats want to do.
2. Denounce and oppose it.
Care to cite a single case where that 'twas the sole provocation and the related result?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
Howzabout no provocation. When the prosecution got hold of the video refuting everything they said happened, teh lying, and the completely unnescessary violence and needless property damage, the prosecution dropped charges, and the police were put on trial. Watch the whole thing, it was shown that they started going on the resisting arrest rant, busting out the windows, punching the guy, and accusing him of "tring to grab my gun" while his hands were up.
Then again, I suspect with your ridiculous, "Cite a single case" comment, you fully approve of the way they handled this, the way they hid the evidence, don't ya?
Hey, here's another one for you.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
Oh yeah, I'll bet that lady cop doing the strip search had a good time, especially since she used the same glove to insert her finger up the woman's vagina after she stuck it up the woman's rectum
Enjoy, and Merry Fsstivus.
Just on a point of order, women have worked outside the home as long as men have worked. The only "liberating" that was done involved fewer requirements for physical strength in order to work and the mass production of white goods, reducing the effort involved in housework to a couple of hours a day.
Glad you brought that up. The modern day conveniences had taken the housewife position from a full time job, to one that can be accomplished in short order. So a lot of women were likely getting bored out of their minds. And while little children are in need of constant attention, after they are all off at school, there is a vacuum that needs filled.
Now your mentioning of women working outside the home is interesting, because it brings up the matter of the "Rosie the Riveter" women working in industry during World War 2.
These ladies performed completely competent work. So why, after the war, did they so willingly trade off their war work, to go back to being housewives?
If STEM jobs are so bad why do men do them? Do women just make better choices?
Note - you applied the word "bad" here. For most of my career, I wouldn't have thought of doing anything else. That's not a "bad" job.
But the rub is this. Many - most? women wouldn't do what I did. Why? I dunno, I can only give reasons from experience. And perhaps for many people, a job with irregular hours, travel, sometimes dangerous work, sometimes working in primitive conditions, and work so diverse in nature, I kept a suit shirt and tie as well as farmer clothing because I never knew what would come up. For some, that was a bad job. I loved the variety of the work. But no reason why any motivated female couldn't do it.
And I think that's the point. Motivation. Not all tech jobs are as demanding. But if I only programmed all day - yeah, I'd not find that a good job.
That is NOT what the study said. The study stated that men were more likely to receive the Darwin awards than females. They suggested possible reasons for this including selection and reporting bias (ex. it's more OK to laugh at the deaths of men then that of men).
Would it not be true that natural selection would select for women who were predisposed toward being risk averse? If you want your offspring to survive to reproduce, you can't be doing the prehistorical version of base jumping.
And for men, especially in prehistoric times, those who took risks might have been rewarded with more and better food, and therefore could provide more for their offspring.
Simplistic, it's true, but I have to say there is something to it. My better half is quite risk averse - but it happened after we had a child. Before that, she was into horseback riding and some sports. After the child was born, th ehorseback riding tailed off unti she just stopped. Now, she's pretty much stopped any risky behavior at all. As in a merry-go-round is beyond her comfort level.
On the other hand, I'm into Hockey (playing) motorcycling, and regularly climb towers and rooftops as part of my other hobby. As a concession, to her, I haven't bungee jumped - yet.
This is not to say that if a woman wants to do something, she shouldn't because it is a "guy thing". If she can, there's no reason why she shouldn't.
WTF is this modded Troll? See my quote from TFA below that DIRECTLY SUPPORTS PARENT'S ASSERTION:
"Dozens of women stayed in safe jobs, in or out of technology, while they watched their spouses or former lab partners take on ambitious quests."
There are people her who pull out the sexist card, the downmods, unless you conform to their very narrow perception of reality. Someone called me sexist because I noted it isn't difficult to walk over to the "boys to section", after I said I'd let my daughters play with any toy they wanted, be it tradional male, or female type toy. Expect this post to be hit with either flamebait or troll about ten minutes after I post it.
And yes, that quote is in the story.
I thiink the answer to why a lot of women are not going into particular fields is twofold. First off, you have to really really want to be a STEM worker. There are better paying jobs, with better job prospects, better pay, and one each shitload more prestige than STEM work.
If my offspring was engaged to a programmer, I'd ask him or her if they had any plans for when their job was outsourced.
In my own case, I spent a lot of extra hours, including overnights at the job. Field trips with indeterminate length of stay. Lost a lot of vacation, (Got a couple months a year, took a week or less. Times that over 30 plus years.
I think that for all the bitching and moaning over this subject, the answer is much simpler than the variations on the "Men suck" meme.
In the earlier days of post liberation, women tried a lot of different careers. Eventually, they found out which ones they wanted to be in. And it doesn't have a whole lot to do with what we are hearning about.
I find it hard to believe that the often shy geeks in STEM fields are more sexist than the business people in industry where "escorts" are a standard practice. It does not compute.
And I have worked in efforts to engage young women in STEM fields. In the end, I've come to the conclusion that there two ways to get more women in STEM fields. Either force more women into them, or fire men until we reach equal gender representation.
Seriously. Neolithic people dying at age 20? So that gives humans at the time only a few years from when they hit puberty until they die to have and [begin to] raise children? I can hear the kids now: "My parents were so old when they died, I actually vaguely remember them!"
Well, if they use average age, that figure idoesn't mean you hit 20, and you're dead.
But back in the day, infant mortality was pretty high, and there wasn't much in the way of treatment for things we consider NBD now. So average age was a lot less than likley maximum age.
As for the business of having offspring, reproduction happened pretty much as soon as it was possible. Our present day belief of getting married and starting a family in our mid-30's or even early 40's is a completely artificial construct. This is why I have always questioned the modern day truism that it is better to wait maybe 15 years after you can reproduce to start to reproduce. Hard to imagine all that evolution providing that for us.
Which is also part of my smartphones as an addiction jeremiad.
Excellent. I have another word to add to my vocabulary. It is a shame I will only ever be able to use it in writing
I love the word, but yes, it's difficult to find a good place to use it. People think I'm talking about a group of guys named Jeremiah, or maybe some sort of fairy.
BTW, most of the people replying to you are morons if they can not understand what you are saying about how OTHER people seem to have a hard time without a cell signal. You were perfectly clear to me.
They are the addicts.
What's "batshit insane" is following too closely. "Don't look at the original cause of the problem, let's look at secondary and tertiary effects." Bah.
Umm, you are saying what? You disagree with me that a system that causes accidents is not batshit insane?
Or, you know, just drive fucking slower so that you can safely stop in time.
True. Remember though, all actions have consequences. Driving slower, and leaving a safe distance between vehicles will slow traffic. Multiply that by the huge number of vehicles, and you have traffic issues, More cars in any area for a longer period of time.
This is in no way trying to excuse tailgating. I always leave a lot of space between myself and the next guy, both so that I avoid running into somoene's rear, and to give myself a buffer for the asshole behind me. But given that people like to ride as close as possible (as in maybe 4 feet) behind each other, I'm leaving maybe 60 feet at 35 mph, which would allow "normal" drivers to shoehorn in three vehicles.
Under these circumstances, the person found at fault will almost always be the person who rear-ended the car in front. If the car in front of you is stopping to avoid a red light, and you haven't allowed adequate distance to stop so you are forced to rear-end them, guess what? You are already a "high-risk" tailgating driver.
Yes, they were not in full control of their car. My point is not that they were not doing something they shouldn't have by following too closely, My point is that this system has made creating accidents where they wouldn't have otherwise happened an inherent part of the system. And that is batshit insane
When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall one by one, an unpitied sacrifice in a contemptible struggle. - Edmund Burke
