SAT scores correlate closely with measured IQ, and, when taken together with high school grades, are a decent predictor of success at university. I do think that article discounts the extent to which the SAT can be "gamed", though. Of course, if you get a high score because you spent hours studying the SAT in order to get a high score then that also measures something. Maybe not intelligence, but "ambition" and "self-discipline". Which, of course, also contribute to success at university (and in the job market).
when really you just consider anyone who doubts your sincerity a douchebag
This is not accurate. There are plenty of people who disagree with me on various things and who may "doubt my sincerity" but whom I nevertheless don't consider douchebags.
An editorial from the LA Times says it's vital for other cities nearby to increase their minimum wage, too, else businesses will gradually migrate to cheaper locations.
Even if the surrounding cities don't raise their minimum wage levels, businesses in those cities will have to start paying their hourly employees more because of increased hourly wages in nearby Los Angeles. Why would I work at McDonald's for $8/hr in a suburb when I could drive an extra 10 minutes and make $15/hr at a McDonald's in L.A.? Answer: I wouldn't. Ergo the McDonald's in the burbs will have to offer a wage that at least approaches the current L.A. wage or it will struggle to hire staff.
Seriously? You're going to claim that RoK explicitly confirming the diametric opposition of the MRM and PUA ideologies is somehow proof that RoK is part of the MRM instead of opposed to it?
First off, RoK doesn't explicitly reject PUA. It rejects MRM, but in rejecting the MRM it seems to define the movement differently than how those in that movement would define it. So RoK is distancing itself from something, perhaps certain segments of the MRM, but not the MRM as a whole.
What about the reverse? Would most guys in the MRM be shocked and horrified if they read a random sampling of articles from RoK?
1. RoK founded by a guy (RooshV) who is closely tied to the PUA community.
2. Wikipedia calling RoK a "site dedicated to men's rights issues".
3. RoK making no mention of PUA in its rather lengthy "About" section.
4. RoK explicitly disassociating itself from the MRM, but only by redefining the MRM in a way that's not entirely accurate.
To the extent it makes sense to draw a line between the MRM and RoK, though, I'll modify my claim: "There is significant overlap between those who share the stated goals of RoK, which have nothing to do with PUA, and the PUA community."
Buddy also thinks that SJW is the same level of pejorative
Not true. I do, however, think most people who use it are douchebags. Hence my suggestions for acronyms to describe them.
It doesn't make any sense to complain the term is pejorative. Any term those of us who find Social Justice Warriors repugnant uses to describe them will be pejorative, just as "liberal" is to a conservative or vice-versa.
I'm not complaining about the fact that it's pejorative. I was responding in disagreement to another poster who claimed it is not pejorative. "Liberal" isn't per se pejorative because it is frequently used in a non-pejorative sense. Liberals call themselves "liberals", for instance. "SJW", on the other hand, is almost exclusively used by folks who mean to evoke a connotation of contempt and/or disapproval. Which is pretty much exactly the definition of "pejorative".