Time travel from whose perspective? To you what seems like ten-thousands of years will seem to a traveler going at relativistic speeds like hundreds of years.
133 karma · joined May 24, 2011
How does that compare to the cost of running drug enforcement agencies, prisons, or treating preventable drug related diseases?
I'm not arguing against the dangers of drugs. My point is if your only interaction with drug users is through people who have hit rock bottom then you are operating under a selection bias.
>I have seen the results, and the HUGE costs, with my own eyes.
How many of these costs are a result of the drugs being illegal? Lack of access to clean needles and clean drugs is what causes the spread of diseases like HIV and Hepatitis C. Artificial scarcity of drugs is the leading reason why addicts turn to crime.
On what grounds do you make this claim?
Perhaps for every user that makes it to your hospital there are 2-3 that don't and are relatively adjusted. Drugs certainly have their hazards but it's fallacious to extrapolate the big picture from the perspective you are presenting.
>the historical gender bias is undeniably pro-male, so people have focused on the bigger problem
You're comparing apples to oranges. What's worse having a 5-15% risk of sexual assault or having 15% of your gender die like Soviet men in WWII? Trying to turn this into a pissing contest isn't a logically valid way to approach this topic. Both genders face hazards that are qualitatively unrankable.
You might be able to reduce critical paths using memristors and 3d circuits but I imagine there are other fundamental issues.
That's false.
A) It is a woman's choice to have children.
B) The "Best Interest Clause" creates a power differential over the children. If she wants to work full-time she can, If she wants to be a house-wife she can. So what choice does the father have in this situation? If this works its way to family court the father will be legally bound to the "provider" role due to the "best interest".
C) Women in general are still seeking out men that have the potential to be providers. They have the choice to seek out men that will be house-dads and that is not happening.
Women by law and cultural norms have the choice to balance home life and career in ways that a man does not.
All the evidence points that women in general seek out a balanced lifestyle in ways that men do not have the freedom to.
A claim of victim hood by a male violates this norm. There is little established protocol for this situation and is basically taboo. So even outside of a politically fragile context there's already a power differential as far as talking frankly or seeking empathy goes.
B)The Equal Rights Amendment which would have required drafting for both sexes was defeated by a woman organization(STOP ERA).
That's my point.
"The fact that there is a societal preference toward masculinity, which underlies many of your points, is definitely a topic that gets brought up in feminine circles. This is why it's comparatively okay for women to be tomboys and such, and highly frowned upon for men to be effeminate or show what are considered feminine traits."
My point is that's not a fact. I mean look at what you're saying. You're saying that the fact a gay male is more likely to experience stigma, have less support, more likely to be a victim of hate crime, and more likely to kill himself than his gay female counterpart is an offense against the feminine. The determining factor for these injustices is being biologically male.
"Many feminists call this general societal enforcement of gender roles part of patriarchy, and seek to remove the stigma associated with violating these roles. So if that's something you're interested in, there's no reason you can't find common cause."
In theory there is no reason why there can't be common cause. Gender analysis is gender analysis. In practice it usually doesn't work out that way.
"Weakness" in females signals a socialized response to reach out and support. "Weakness" in males signals a socialized response to stigmatize. Because after all you are privileged, why don't you just "man-up"?
"Social justice theorists also talk about different kinds of privileges, so the idea that geeks have male privilege does not exclude the possibility that there is another form of privilege that they lack that others have."
That's my point. When is the last time you read an article about leveling the field of female privilege? In theory the idea of privilege is inclusive but in practice it's not.
The irony here is that the stigmatization of "nerds" was/is a product of males falling outside acceptable gender roles as well. Calling these males "privileged" is a way to dismiss and marginalize them.
Why is it that the majority of feminist articles I run into feel the need to dismiss the problems of "privileged" in making an argument for their perspective? They are not mutually exclusive. Perhaps it's selection bias and only controversial articles float to the top but it really seems like this is the norm.
This may seem like a personal decision, but it has serious consequences for patients and the public.
Medical education is supported by federal and state tax money both at the university level — student tuition doesn’t come close to covering the schools’ costs — and at the teaching hospitals where residents are trained. So if doctors aren’t making full use of their training, taxpayers are losing their investment. With a growing shortage of doctors in America, we can no longer afford to continue training doctors who don’t spend their careers in the full-time practice of medicine."
http://parenting.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/06/13/should-women-b...
It doesn't explain why the female involvement for CS is so pathetically low compared to other traditionally male careers but I think it explains the values with which many woman are making lifestyle decisions.
As soon as a man becomes married this switches. A man is more likely to take on extra hours/responsibilities and a woman is more likely to work part-time at this point. It's the over-time and hazard pay that is associated with the wage gap. A person working 80 hours per week should not have the same hourly-wage as someone working 30 hours per week regardless of gender.
Every stat I run into on the matter shows career focused women being less likely to have children or have them much later in life. Apparently there is a limiting resource whether it is time, money, or energy.
Sure if economics could be reduced to gambling it is zero-sum but betting in economics is betting on those who will create value(ideally).
Historically, social costs are externalized to men in exchange for "glory" or "power". This isn't some explicit tactic though.
1)All organisms are driven towards certain outcomes. Even if driven only towards reproduction.
2)Even an organism "at rest" is actively fighting/"moving" against the direction of entropy.
The core of your issue seems to do with anthropomorphisis not teleology. A lot of people conflate teleology with anthropomorphisis because their first introduction to the idea is through the "watchmaker argument" for a creator.
But... If you're projecting a computational view on biology as many Molecular Biologists now do. You are entertaining a machine that is processing/reasoning about data. Saying that a machine can reason is an anthropomorphic interpretation.
Not all anthropomorphisis is equal. There's a difference between pre-rational anthropomorphisis and isomorphic constructs like entropy, computation, teleological processes, etc...
"As early as the 1980s, researchers started viewing DNA or genomes as the dynamic storage of a language system with precise computable finite states represented as a finite state machine (Searls, 1993). Recent complex systems research has also suggested some far-reaching commonality in the organization of information in problems from biology, computer science, and physics, such as the Bose–Einstein condensate (a special state of matter, Bianconi and A.L. Barabási, 2001)."
Old pond, frog jumps in - plop!
Cultivating "witnessing detachment" is still fundamental to these traditions. It's just considered incomplete without a cultivation of heart.
Buddhism typically evokes the image of monks sitting in caves. This is more characteristic of Theravada Buddhism. Mahayana Buddhism is about bringing the Buddhist way into all aspects of life. In Zen(Mahayana branch) temples for example, simply washing the dishes is an art in itself.
I find Android widgets valuable for a similar reason. I have widgets for task list and upcoming calendar events with the "Quick Event" app to quickly enter new ones. I never have to go out of my way for this information and it's there unobtrusively reminding me.
Emergent Behavior.
Even if you don't buy the emergent behavior perspective modeling biology as a flat plane of chemical and physical interactions is orders of magnitudes greater than most chemistry and physics models.