Stereotypes generally have a damned good reason to be stereotypes. Getting called misogynistic or not, if it's true of a significant enough subsample of the population, it can and should be used.

Which is exactly what you'd expect to see when your only view of them is coming filtered through a heavily left-leaning press.

Heh, if you think politics is about issues, you really haven't been paying attention. It's first, last, always, and only about power. If you ever manage to understand that, you'll be flying the tea party flag too. Until it inevitably becomes as corrupt as every other political group anyway.

Republicans and the tea party are not remotely the same thing. They simply overlap at the moment as both oppose increase governmental power under Obama. Will they all remain true to their stated goals when a power-hungry Republican is in office? Not a chance but I expect a significant portion of those who actually understood and believed in the impetus behind the tea party will.

I thought it did. Your line of reasoning implies the claim that social inertia in the tech field is vastly higher than in the medical field. My reply was meant to convey that I understood what you were saying as well as my skepticism.

Untrue. Neural pathway development that has taken place under one set of conditions is not instantly overwritten by changing the conditions.

As for the rest, TG are possibly a valuable dataset but not an especially easy one to study as they've already shown one significant and poorly understood aberration from the norm. Also, I find it difficult to take you seriously if you find simple gender nomenclature offensive; it does not speak well of your ability to accept what is over what you wish to be.

Which would be a valid point if we were arguing about this in 1965.

Which would be a valid point were it not a strawman argument. Significant != primary. There likely isn't even a primary cause with as many factors as there are to take into consideration.

It is extremely difficult to isolate a variable in living human beings' behavior yet you want to completely discount actual physical and chemical difference in the one organ that controls all decision making. That is willful blindness at best and at worst outright politically motivated fraud.

I think there is a high likelihood that the differing brain structure and soup of hormones/other chemicals their brains swim in may play a significant role, yes. Throwing out from consideration a known variable before the experiment because you don't want it to be true is extremely poor science.

Probably for the same reason that women are capable of breast feeding while men aren't. They are not equal. Equality under the law does not, should not, and never will mean that men and women are actually the same.

There's no mystery about that. The party that's in power always wants more power and the opposition always opposes it. In that the Democrats and Republicans are exactly the same. The teabaggers you're so unfond of are the only ones in the nation who want the government to have less power even when their guys win.

In Linux, it takes longer to decide on an optimal setup than it does to write wmctrl hotkeys to place+size windows however your little heart desires. And has for a very long time.

I'm not switching from gasoline until someone makes an engine that will run on distilled suffering of hippies.

Nobody can see that you shit your pants while typing that but anyone in the room can easily tell.

Gold is not succeptible to a typo sending it into a black hole. Gold doesn't require multiple backups to avoid losing everything to a drive crash. Gold is exceedingly resistant to hacking. Gold transfers do not require you to wait for 2-10 verifications. And last but certainly not least gold has intrinsic value since it has uses other than currency.

BTC has its potential uses but as a currency will never be one of them if only because of the extreme slowness of verifiying a transfer compared to say a credit/debit card transfer.