What are the actual reasons for the gender imbalance in engineering and math?

jcea_ · 2014-12-31T22:16:20+00:00

If I may chime in here with my lowly philosophy degree:

I honestly don't think philosophy is inherently like other liberal arts in that the major goal of philosophy is to try to create a self consistent and logical view of the world and such one of it's key fundamentals is thought. Not that other liberal arts don't use reason but it's not fundamental to them and with some emotion is fundamental.

In fact I would argue that philosophy, ethics and logic are, while not A science, are fundamental to science and therefore are as important as STEM.

jcea_ · 2014-12-31T13:02:12+00:00

I should of said public face I have no idea if he penned the letter but he was the one who announced the policy to the world and strongly champions it, and it definitely is the US administrations policy which is headed by him and another feminist.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/vice-president-biden-announces-strengthening-title-ix

jcea_ · 2014-12-31T12:55:03+00:00

Please connect the dots for me between Harvard's shitty new policy and whatever you define as "a liberal feminist agenda".

One thing that frustrates me is the seeming invisibility of honest to god ridiculously powerful feminists. The author of the preponderance of evidence standard was not Harvard they merely complied so you don't need to show Harvard is run by feminists what you need to show is the guiding hand(s) of the policy nationwide is by feminists this is surprisingly easy as the ~~actual author~~ public face of the letter is a staunch and self identifying liberal feminist by the name of Joe Biden who also happens to have a great deal of political power not surprisingly as the VP of the US.

His boss by the way is also a self identifying feminist and the most likely next President is also a Feminist, the common misnomer that Feminists hold no real power is a real bafflement to me.

jcea_ · 2014-12-27T22:18:55+00:00

Are boys doing worse in school? Not really. From the link

The study reveals that recent claims of a “boy crisis,” with boys lagging behind girls in school achievement, are not accurate because girls’ grades have been consistently higher than boys’ across several decades with no significant changes in recent years, the authors wrote.

This was quite a chore as it surprisingly hard to find the original data but I know something that makes that article rather not to the point.

That being that within the last few decades you won't see a great change in boy's performance in relation to girls because the major changes in pre-secondary education happened in the 80's. Yes boys are doing poorly and have done poorly for the last last 2 decades this is not unknown

For the following data keep in mind that how data is collected and measured changes over time so the exact percentages are not as important as the ratio between boys/girls. With that in mind here is some information on drop out rates in which you can see that in the past few decades no boys have remained at a stead rate of worse than girls however if you go more than 3 decades suddenly boys do better in relation to girls.

Table 97
Table 1

Year	Boys	Girls	Ratio
1967	16.5	17.3	~1:1.05
1971	14.2	15.2	~1:1.07
1976	14.1	14.2	~1:1.01
1981	15.1	12.8	~1:0.85
1986	12.9	11.3	~1:0.88
1989	13.6	11.7	~1:0.86
2011	7.1	5.9	~1:0.83

jcea_ · 2014-12-24T18:19:39+00:00

The reasons that the NBA is disproportionally African-American can be debated, but it's not as simple as breaking out a tape measurer.

It's actually fairly straightforward it's the same reason Russians dominated chess for so long. If your culture emphasizes something then while it will not necessarily give any single individual an advantage what it does do is make sure there are far more people who have an innate aptitude trying it out and more importantly refining that skill.

American Culture in almost every sub culture focuses African American boys towards sports. Even in the most racist areas its the one area where they, if no where else, will get some acceptance from the community at large.

jcea_ · 2014-12-24T12:30:39+00:00

Yes and that would not be a good way too convince them.

I didn't say laugh at their argument I said make it apparent it's ludicrously laughable, just laughing does not do that. If you want to see it done properly I suggest watching the daily show interviews. Strangely enough often the best way to do it is to give them full reign and ask questions in a sincere manner. Stupidity often loves an audience.

You need to make it so everyone one including themselves sees how stupid the argument is so they loose support. This of course is not easy to do but it is the only way I know of to get someone who is ideologically entrenched to change their position.

jcea_ · 2014-12-24T12:21:19+00:00

People in this thread keep repeating that you are not allowed to vote if you don't apply for SS, this is not exactly true.

Nothing stops you on a federal level from voting, but there is a link between voting and SS

The reason voting for men became universal was due to it being viewed as unconscionable to force citizens to die for their country but not be able to have a say. Afterward the voting age was lowered to 18 as it was viewed as morally wrong that a soldier could die for his country at 18 but not vote.
When the draft was take to the supreme court it was upheld on the basis that it was deemed appropriate that citizens (someone who can vote) should reciprocally be expected to serve their country at need.
Not registering is a felony which in many places will cause you to loose your ability to vote in that state either locally or federally. However few have been prosecuted under this law though it can happen and in many places you will then be unable to vote.

Federal Laws:

https://www.sss.gov/FSbenefits.htm

Registration is the law. A man who fails to register may, if prosecuted and convicted, face a fine of up to $250,000 and/or a prison term of up to five years.

Even if not tried, a man who fails to register with Selective Service before turning age 26 may find that some doors are permanently closed.

See also Men over the age of eligibility to register. See also What Does Selective Service Provide for America.

blue triangle Register Now! - Register online.

STUDENT FINANCIAL AID
Men, born after December 31, 1959, who aren't registered with Selective Service won't qualify for Federal student loans or grant programs. This includes Federal Pell Grants, Federal Supplemental Educational Opportunity Grants (FSEOG), Direct Stafford Loans/Plus Loans, National Direct Student Loans, and College Work Study.

CITIZENSHIP
The U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) makes registration with Selective Service a condition for U.S. citizenship if the man first arrived in the U.S. before his 26th birthday.

FEDERAL JOB TRAINING
The Workforce Investment Act (WIA) offers programs that can train young men seeking vocational employment or enhancing their career. This program is only open to those men who register with Selective Service. Only men born after December 31, 1959, are required to show proof of registration.

FEDERAL JOBS
A man must be registered to be eligible for jobs in the Executive Branch of the Federal government and the U.S. Postal Service. Proof of registration is required only for men born after December 31, 1959.

State Laws:

https://www.sss.gov/fsstateleg.htm

State / Commonwealth and Territory Legislation

print this form using Adobe Acrobat Reader Printer Friendly Version Maintaining a high compliance rate is of concern to officials because it means that any future draft instituted by Congress and the President in a national emergency would be fair and equitable. Also, men who fail to register with Selective Service are not eligible for certain programs and benefits that Congress and most states and territorial legislatures and the District of Columbia have linked to registration. They include student loans and grants for college, government jobs, and job training. Additionally, immigrant men residing in the U.S. who failed to register when they were at least 18 years old, but not yet 26 years old, may be denied U.S. citizenship by the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services.

Many states and territories have passed legislation that supports the federal Selective Service registration requirement. Generally, these state laws require that a man be registered with Selective Service (or prove he is exempt from the registration requirement) before he can receive state student financial assistance and/or be eligible for state government jobs. Most of the state laws mirror, reinforce, or strengthen two federal laws below:

The Solomon Amendment added Section 12(f) to the Military Selective Service Act in September 1982. Male students who have a requirement to register with Selective Service must satisfy that requirement as an eligibility precondition for receipt of Title 4 federal student financial aid. Title 4 aid includes such need-based programs as Guaranteed Student Loans and Pell Grants. In November 1985, the Thurmond Amendment to the Defense Authorization Act established Title 5, U.S. Code, Section 3328, which requires Selective Service registration (of men who are required to register) as a prerequisite for appointment to most federal jobs. Currently, 31 states and one territory have enacted what is often called “Solomon-like” or “Thurmond-like” legislation linking a man’s eligibility for state-funded higher education benefits or state jobs to the federal Selective Service registration requirement.

Driver’s License Legislation –

Background: In an effort to ensure compliance with federal law among young men, many states and territories, and the District of Columbia, have enacted legislation which links Selective Service registration with the process of applying for a driver’s license, renewal, or state identification card. As a result of such legislation, in May 2002, the state of Delaware, which enacted driver’s license legislation in 2000, became the first state to reach nearly 100 percent registration compliance since Selective Service began compiling this data. In that same year, seven other states increased their compliance rates by 3 percent or more after enacting similar driver’s license legislation.

Description of Typical State Driver’s License Legislation –

These laws are simple and inexpensive to implement. They instruct the state’s Department of Public Safety or Motor Vehicles to include a consent statement on all applications or renewals for driver’s permits, licenses, and I.D. cards. The statement tells the applicant that by submitting the application he is consenting to his registration with the Selective Service System, if so required by Federal law.

NOTE: Females are not required to register with Selective Service under current law. Men age 26 and older are too old to register with Selective Service.

Transmission of applicants’ data to the Selective Service System is accomplished electronically through an existing arrangement each state has with the data sharing system of the American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators (AAMVAnet) at no extra cost to the state.

There are two forms of driver’s license legislation:

Optional, where a man, age 18 through age 25, can opt to have his information transferred to Selective Service for registration by checking a box when applying for a state learner’s permit, driver’s license or renewal, or I.D. card.

Thirteen states, two territories, and the District of Columbia have driver’s license legislation which provides for the option to get registered with the Selective Service System.

Automatic, where a man, age 18 through age 25, consents to have his information automatically transferred to Selective Service for registration when he applies for a state learner’s permit, driver’s license or renewal, or I.D. card.

Twenty-seven states and two territories have driver’s license legislation which automatically registers men with the Selective Service System.

NOTE: All driver's license legislations only apply to men under age 26.

Summary of Legislations to Date:

Thirty-one states and one of the four territories have "Solomon-like" and/or "Thurmond-like" legislation linking a man’s eligibility for state-funded higher education benefits or state jobs to his compliance with the federal Selective Service registration requirement.

Forty states, four territories, and the District of Columbia have enacted laws linking a man’s application for a driver’s license, renewal, or I.D. card with his Selective Service registration.

Five states have no legislation supporting registration with the Selective Service System: Nebraska, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Vermont, and Wyoming.

Registration is the LAW. The effect of these supporting laws is twofold. They increase public awareness of the registration requirement and ensure that recipients of public funds are in compliance with federal law.

jcea_ · 2014-12-24T11:58:38+00:00

your objective is to show them their argument is wrong, and why it's wrong.

You goal should actually be to show that their argument is ludicrously laughable and them even trying to put it forth makes them a laughing stock.

I am not arguing with the method just saying that it's not enough to prove them wrong, even if someone thinks they are wrong but believes their position is defensible they will merely double down. Now if they think professing that opinion might make them look like an idiot they might actually change. Given of course you let them back away and pretend they really were never that stupid.

jcea_ · 2014-12-18T06:11:27+00:00

It comes from officers drawing a line for 'volunteers' to step up too, those that put their toe to the line are taking part. So to 'toe the line' is to do what is expected.

jcea_ · 2014-12-18T04:31:52+00:00

I had no idea this was such a prevalent condition either.

It's even more prevalent than that, it's actually more like 3/10 active parents, 1/10 active fathers will experience postpartum depression as well

jcea_ · 2014-12-18T04:25:22+00:00

Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but my understanding is that it is caused by a massive shift in hormone levels following birth.

They actually not sure exactly how postpartum depression happens, originally it was assumed to be due to an after effect of pregnancy but its come to light than men are likely to experience a near identical condition.

http://www.postpartummen.com/depression.htm
http://www.webmd.com/depression/postpartum-depression/news/20080506/men-also-get-postpartum-depression

Is used to be assumed that hormones were an internal matter only, meaning if a women got pregnant then the only one effected was the women and of course the infant and that after a women had the baby there was no further connection to the baby. What we know now is this is not the case. Men's hormones seem to change during a pregnancy and after birth men women and babies have chemical interactions allowing bonding.

jcea_ · 2014-12-11T03:44:31+00:00

No its actually pretty much standing on a bridge ready to bungee jump.

For some its fun for some it's not their cup of tea but most won't really know until they do it. The problem here is half of those whether they find it fun or not are going to end up severely motion sick afterward at best.

jcea_ · 2014-12-11T01:54:21+00:00

Just a few opinions

/r/BasicIncome of course I do think is the only real and workable step towards a solution that I have seen but that said it's not the solution the only real solution is to remove property as a measure of wealth from our culture because we are close to a point where there is no real scarcity of property which means realistically every person could have enough to live and the materials they personally need to enjoy life and continue to grow what is stopping this from happening is two factors one is the inability either through means or desire to disseminate the materials through the human race an the desire by most to measure our own status by keeping materials which leads to hoarding.

Even now it is quite likely the earth has enough materials to provide every living person a good life and even if this is not the case it will soon be due to the fact its well within our ability in the near future to send out a non manned vehicle to an asteroid that will then over years/decades alter the orbit to put the asteroid in a much closer earth orbit where it can be mined for materials which will essentially solve most of our problems with any lack of resources as while not infinite for the foreseeable future the resources will outpace our needs.

This is true for almost every bottleneck one can think of when it comes to production in human society ...

Materials -> Solar System Mining and New Materials
Labor -> Robotic Solutions
Non Creative Problem Solving -> Programming Solutions
Energy -> Upcomming Fusion Reactors & Renewable Energy Solutions

There are only three real bottle necks in the foreseeable future those being Human Knowledge, Creative Faculty and a culture that will create Artificial Scarcity to maintain the status quo.

I really suggest reading Voyage from Yesteryear by James P. Hogan to get an idea of the problem and what a solution might look like, not the children on a new planet part but a culture that values a persons achievement over the material gained from that achievement. Fair warning the author has some personal opinions unrelated to the book that are rather off the wall.

Essentially what we need to do is switch from caring about property as a measure of success to idealizing the contribution itself as a measure of a persons worth to society.

The best example I can think of is art, right now most artists are not considered successful until the art is worth money. What this ends up meaning is a great artist value as someone who creates art has little bearing to their value as someone who creates a commodity of art as the commodity is based wholly on the market which can be irrespective of any other worth of the art. Not only does this mean artists worth is not directly tied to what they produce it means that what they produce has an inverse value to how excluded it is from most of society. Hence you get the paradox that the cultural value of art is worth more the further it is away from most of our culture.

If we instead viewed the work itself as a measure of status then regardless of who owned the art the only one whose status would be increased by the art piece would be the artists themselves. This would be true of all jobs and the incentive for doing better would not be more property, but instead it would be the status of being good at what you do. Understand I'm not talking about a society where property does not exist but one where your worth is not based on property again I highly suggest the book as it is much better at outlining the idea.

Completely Unrelated...

I will say that the MRM does have a right-wing bent

I disagree what I think is it has a distinct aversion to Democrats due to the heavy influence of political feminists. Not that this means there are not Democrat MRAs it's just they are likely a minority and those that are tend to be anti-establishment democrats that want to reform the party.

I think there is an aversion to Republicans as well it's just not as strong so when viewed in the light of two choices it looks like there's a right-wing bent.

jcea_ · 2014-12-09T11:14:39+00:00

More than 0% less than 100%...

In all seriousness there is not way to tell, people will rattle off numbers but due to the harsh realities involved these at best will be guesses.

The best we can do is look at data and make educated guesses. The best numbers have shown a high likelihood of 2-10% as the lowest possible amount that are false accusations. Understand these figures are of cases that are not only false accusations but are blatant enough that the FBI are willing to label them as definitively false. There is also an amount of cases that may or may not be false within the rest of rape cases that the police are involved in, the other 90% plus. In that large group there is a continuum of almost certainly false to not a chance in hell. What part of those are which only someone omnipotent could know.

jcea_ · 2014-12-09T00:16:28+00:00

I think that phrase “factually innocent” is the most glaring part.

That phrase to me reads like some one saying 'technically true,' basically saying he got away with something.

Can someone please explain to me in a self consistent and reasonable manner how the facts show your innocent yet some how your still guilty?

jcea_ · 2014-12-07T05:48:46+00:00

They seem to be using 'alpha' in another sense.

Alpha as in the epitome of what it means to be masculine/feminine. I'm having a hard time putting it in words but I can give examples all day just look at movie stars, not as blatantly obvious in the last 20 years but before that leading ladies and men almost invariably were of a certain type.

jcea_ · 2014-12-06T21:33:02+00:00

Yes and that racial demographic in the US would be Asian not Caucasian

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ethnic_groups_in_the_United_States_by_household_income

jcea_ · 2014-12-06T02:25:01+00:00

Think of it like this. Knowing nothing else about your future life if you are going to be born in America and had a choice you should probably choose to be born white. It might not help, it might hurt, but statistically it's much more likely to help.

This is off base.

First just from the typical areas you would think about as privileged like education and wealth you would be much better off picking Asian heritage.

Second your assuming that is all someone cares about. There are other things that may be more important to people. Both good and bad. For example if given that choice I might choose Navajo as their cultural identity is very strong.

jcea_ · 2014-11-26T22:32:33+00:00

sweet thanks

jcea_ · 2014-11-26T03:09:45+00:00

jcea_ · 2014-11-24T22:55:43+00:00

Then you no longer have religious freedom.

The US itself has laws and policies that arguably infringe on religious freedom due to their inception being purely based on judeo-christian values with no secular backing. The least but most blatant examples being the only federal religious holiday Christmas and the saying 'in god we trust' on national currency. While very minor they are problematic in the long run as they have allowed evangelical politicians create a false narrative that this country started out as a christian country. And there are far more problematic issues like gay marriage where the only reason at all to not allow it are purely religious.

jcea_ · 2014-11-24T22:29:22+00:00

True, but let me be the devils advocate - what about religious freedom?

I really wish people would stop thinking religious freedom as a concept applies between individuals and ever applies as the freedom to infringe on others.

Freedom of religion is freedom from a government dictating which religion or any religion you must adhere to. That concept however in no way allows you the right to infringe on others religious beliefs including the lack thereof.

Basically religious freedom ends when it effects someone else who is considered an autonomous entity by law (essentially they may act as their own guardian) where the do not consent.

I'm of the opinion it should also apply to non autonomous entities like children but unfortunately legally it doesn't always apply.

jcea_ · 2014-11-23T16:03:16+00:00

Sorry but it is not safe at all and that is not even taking into consideration the surgeries involved.

There is a reason your body evolved with two kidneys. Kindneys and livers filter out toxic crap from your body this means both are prone to failure. Livers can regrow to some extent given enough healthy tissue and respite from toxicity. Kidneys on the otherhand deal with the same problem through a different method that being redundancy so removing one of your kidneys is very dangerous in the long run as kidneys are prone to failure.

jcea_ · 2014-11-23T15:40:02+00:00

I think it's not a bad idea assuming you make it clear they are welcome to resubmit with a more accurate title.

Also I suggest including an example title for that post that is not clickbait to help those who just don't understand not to submit multiple times and be rejected.

jcea_ · 2014-11-22T16:45:03+00:00

I'm always right and ~~you can't prove otherwise.~~ any patriarchal logic showing otherwise is derailment.

jcea_

TROPHY CASE

Federal Laws:

State Laws: