We are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for.
Our Recent Essays Behind the Front Page
Friday, October 3. 2014
Friday morning links
Daddy Longlegs Have a Secret Hunting Weapon: Glue
Staged: The Stage World of Ricky and Lucy
The Feminizing Of Culture, And Male Self-Hatred
You Call This Thai Food? The Robotic Taster Will Be the Judge
Women earned majority of doctoral degrees in 2013 for 5th straight year, and outnumber men in grad school 137.5 to 100
Obligatory Al Sharpton Celebrates ‘National Breast Awareness Month’ Post…
I thought that was every month
Not Everyone Can Work for Costco
Media: On the chilling effect, from one of the chillers
UK update: New drug for 'mild alcoholics' drinking two glasses of wine a night
My internist instructed me to drink 2 per evening, for my heart
“How Would Making Donald Trump Less Rich Make Anybody Else Better Off?”
Goldberg on "the wrong side of history"
Russia update: When government protects the environment
UN whistleblowers (still) exposed to retaliation
How Iran Scammed America Out of a Nuclear Deal
Obama Gets His Progressive "War"
Horror as an Instrument of War
New York Times op-ed: Wipe Israel off the map
Life and death with Hamas
Posted by Bird Dog in Hot News & Misc. Short Subjects at 05:13 | Comments (8) | Trackback (1)
Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)
Daddy Longlegs Have a Secret Hunting Weapon: Glue. So did my Grandma. She called it flypaper.
...men in grad school 137.5 to 100. I'd heard it was 1.375:1, but maybe 137.5:100 takes into account gender changers.
Academic/Intellectual Challenge for MF
Dear MF ers. This new way of "doing research"--that is to say getting more research money without having to do the scientific method is becoming the thesis song for more and more females working on graduate degrees. However, I would love to hear from BD, BD, The Barrister, GWTW and buddy(where did he go?) as to what there thoughts are on this "new way of legitimizing fact". Anyone with an understanding of science, engineering, or even the arts is welcome to take a look at this new philosophy click on the link please and give me your thoughts.
"According to a recent report in the New York Times, Obama told Oval Office visitors that if he’d been advising the Islamic State, he would have told them to release our hostages with a note reading, “Stay out of here; this is none of your business.”
Wow. I think it I were advising them I would tell them to knock off the killing and raping and start trying to behave like civilized human beings.
If I were advising them, I point out that Obama won't always be president and as Iran figured out, it's best not to be holding Americans at the end of the new guy's inaugural speech.
A sure sign of the degeneration of an institution is when women take over a formerly male-dominated field.
So to with academia and the preponderance of female Ph.Ds )note my daughter is getting one in astrophysics now.)
My first clue was classical music. When conductors started to shift to females was a sign. Another was female composers getting grants to write music which orchestras got grants to play - once.
Thankfully, American engineering is still male dominated....oh wait!
I have never thought, nor suggested that women should be blocked from working in any field, or holding any job for which they are truly qualified. MY concern is the "qualified" part of this conversation. If women cannot succeed in a field in which we have typically relied upon scientific reasoning--then what is wrong with omitting the "hard part" (scientific reasoning)? If a woman is not able to carry the 80 pound pack and rifle should she get paid the same as the soldier in the field who does. What we have witnessed over and over and over and over is this: women get put onto research projects for the express purpose of managing the calendar, doing the paper work--but, many are not really interested in doing the hard intellectual heavy lifting. HOWEVER, because they are "on the team" they get credit as research scientist, even though all they did was keep track of email and daily bookkeeping. IT DOES NOT MAKE THEM QUALIFIED SCIENTISTS. I once saw a woman appointed to a leadership role who had sat on her girlfriends' committees and they on hers. When interviewed for the job she put her hands under her knees like a child and claimed boldly: "just because I don't know the big words doesn't mean it's not my turn!" She got the job--and helped drive the school into bankruptcy. We must get back to being a country that truly cares about accomplishment, about merit, about in the field experience that pertains to the job at hand. Women doing clean up duty in their youngster's 4 th grade cafeteria do not qualify as leaders. I once spoke with an 11 year old girl who told me: "my mommy says it's alright to steal a man's research and paper, because women have been held down for so many years!" Do you know what she does now--many years later? The NOW puts her into scientific research companies to "take down" straight, white men, who are just pigs and won't give their work to the women in their company. Do you know what she does: suggests sexual abuse, strategizes public embarrassment, etc. SHE GETS PAID TO GO INTO DIFFERENT COMPANIES AND TAKE OUT THE GUYS WHO STILL BELIEVE IN MERIT!
I think the simple explanation for why more women then men are in college and in graduate programs is the free money and grants are intentionally funneled to women and minorities.
The second issue of women and minorities getting jobs they aren't qualified for is a simple result of the explicit and implicit requirements for diversity and affirmative action. It is sad and unfair to push someone into a position that they cannot handle, they are being set up for failure.
I had a friend who worked at a nuclear weapons lab. He had a masters in nuclear technology and was the go to guy for advice on cleaning up nuclear accidents. He had worked there for over 12 years and as number two guy thought he had a good chance at the nuber one job when his boss retired. He was quite suprised when a black women with a masters in biology and no experience was hired into the top position. When he talked to his outgoing boss he was toll this was a win/win because not only did they hire a minority but they hired a woman as well. She stayed less then nine months and by mutual agreement with her boss she voluntarily quit.
Tracked: Oct 05, 10:11