Topic: Behaviour on the Speculation board: women not welcome? (Read 8106 times)

Sorry for the late reply...

My educational background is probably a healthy mix. As an undergrad I studied Political Science with minors in Asian Studies and Philosophy but my Masters is in Educational Technology. While I was an undergrad I worked for my university's IT department. I kind of unintentionally prepared myself for that job by exploring tech (particularly web development) & the Internet instead of doing homework in high school. Plus my parents didn't know squat about computers so somebody had to take care of the viruses and spyware

I agree about 'willingness to take potentially irrational risks' though. Compared to my boyfriend, I am the risk-taker in our relationship. He was very apprehensive about me getting involved in Bitcoins at first because he was worried about the risks involved. His background is CS and Math if that makes a difference.

I would definitely be interested if someone did a survey to find out if it is educational background, willingness to take risks, etc.

+1

This is the trouble with seeing oneself by a quality (i.e. gender, ethnicity, religion, political position), as opposed to seeing oneself as a person.  The only way to escape the cage is to see it.

It's not a matter of "I am a woman and you should respect me"; it's a matter of, "I am a person, so what does my gender matter?"  You only play into the sexist's game by accepting their label, and thus assume the very role you disliked to begin with.

nanobrain, if it makes you feel any better.. there are ladies who emasculate men and get paid in doing so (and they are now accepting bitcoin). https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/professional-dominatrix-323234

i hope this cheers you up. ladies such as those are definitely.. sticking it to the man. they'll tie you up and call you a weak little girl.. oh, wait.. nevermind about that one.

Oh snap, you're a sex-negative feminist... I should have known it. Damn woman, get with the times. Feminism =/= crypto-puritanism, y'know.

nanobrain: Your links don't matter. Your arguing from effect, not from a moral point of view. Once you realize your faulty logic we can have a reasonable discussion.

From the article:
So, to recap: First, we were geniuses. Then, we were harpies. And now, we’re whores.

i don't have a problem with facials either, but then again i'm a guy... BUT i think the term bukkake came when the japanese men who labelled a woman as "the village whore" in order to shame them.

Tell you a little story nan

A few years ago I was in Seattle while the Frida collection was on display at the SAM.  The venue had purchased advertising throughout the market, including wall to wall wraps on some city buses.  I'm waiting at a crosswalk and this bus comes by with that exact self portrait and some toucans on it.  The text, as tall as the bus, literally as big as they could fit, was like

Frida Kahlo

then in letters maybe 20cm high "Diego Rivera and Mexican Impressionism"

It was so fucking cool, I started tearing up and almost lost my balance, still gives me shivers today.



And yet, I don't think there is anything wrong with facials.  It is all about the context.  Sometimes it is not about making the receiver feel dirty, but about making the spewer feel clean.  Lots of boys have very traumatic early sexual experiences with young women suddenly horrified at the physical manifestation of their ecstasy.  Not very surprising, really, if it becomes a complex later in life.  People just want to be accepted.

Buckle up.
Dworkin 1981 - Pornography - Chapter 1 - page 11.

"The power of men is first a metaphysical assertion of self, an I am that exists a priori, bedrock, absolute, no embellishment or apology required, indifferent to denial or challenge.  It expresses intrinsic authority.  It never ceases to exist no matter or on what grounds it is attacked; and some assert that it survives physical death.  This self is not merely subjectively felt. It is protected by laws and customs, upheld in the distribution of wealth. This self cannot be eradicated or reduced to nothing. It is. When the subjective sense of self falters, institutions devoted to it's maintenance buoy it up.

The first tenet of male-supremacist ideology is that men have this self and that women must, by definition, lack it."

OK, last post here for a while.

Here's something a bit more confrontational.

NSFW
http://tigerbeatdown.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/tumblr_l9tddgVlu31qbkli6.jpg

And an interesting discussion.

http://tigerbeatdown.com/2010/10/05/lessons-from-art-feminism-gets-semen-all-over-your-face/

Edit: link fixed.

And for what it's worth, unlike tigerbeatdown I actually think the above is an insight piece - whether the artist is a man or woman is irrespective.

Read the papers and the article...you don't have an oxygen addiction.

Oxygen does not work on the pleasure receptors of the brain creating doperegenic reactions...some foods do though  - chocolate for one.  Cheese actually contains caesomorphines, which are a mild opiates, whihc is why cheese is so nice for most people.

For those with long term exposure, porn creates the same pleasure/reward relationship. 

We are essentially creatures that work on a reward system.  Please everyone, take a chance to read the science before posting a counter argument.

absolutely nothing

arousal is in the mind, if 70 something Hugh's trigger was tripped by the idea of women having sex in front of an audience it is not our place to judge...and your doing so smacks dangerously of Abrahamic puritanism in a new guise.

Sex is natural, pleasurable, and good.  "Sex addiction" is laughable on the face of it.  Know what? I also have an oxygen addiction...cant get enough of the stuff, have to have it every day...food too.

oh man, i like this.. if i were married to a woman like nanobrain, every day i'd feel emasculated as she attempted to sodomize me with her dildo  

So, on the one hand I'm stupid but on the other you chose to ignore the science I've posted links to.

Hhh,mm which is it?

There is a famous quote by Edward de Bono which to paraphrase says, a person's ego stops them exploring information that may contradict the ego's position.  I'd politely suggest perhaps your ego is getting the better of you.

Is not true intellectual intelligence the ability to accept and assimilate new information?

Just from this post it looks from my point of view you're a hysterical feminist and you need to get a grip and realise there are sexists out there as well as people like me who simply don't give a fuck one way or another, yes, if you're being denied job opportunities etc. then you have every right to rant about it but if some random prick says something it doesn't make the slightest bit of difference in the world whether anyone does something about it or not.

By the way, I watch tons of porn and I'm well aware that's not how most women are in real life because I actually talk to them, be sure to get that moronic stereotype out of your head, bitching about female imagery just makes girls seem like they're projecting their own insecurity about their bodies to me and blaming it on the media.

I really hope you're more intelligent than ktttn and that user is supposed to be a guy.

Hi All,
And many thanks to those who have taken the time to post thoughtful replies either pro or anti my position.  Unfortunately, I haven't got time to respond to each individually plus I have received at least one pm which suggests this isn't going to resolve itself nicely.

However, I just want to make a couple of points:

1. To all those who say my OP was OTT...well, maybe it was and maybe there are intellectual or argumentative flaws in there.  But hey, sometimes you are angry and I'm not going apolgise for that - oda.krell: sometimes you get angry when you have a lifetime of this shit and you see it replicated by people who claim to be creating a new fairer world.  

This is my first main point: if crypto is meant to be part of the NWO then this stuff needs to aired and if you are male and this sensitive then really you should go live somewhere where you are in the minority.  You'll soon understand, believe me.

2.  A lot of the advice I am getting is to 'play them at their own game'.  I won't do that because this is a fallacious strategy.  Women behaving like men does not allow women to be women and in the end men will always win: as I said earlier "women wanted liberation but settled for equality".

3. The porn question.  It's a thin end of a wedge and I guess the younger males here have grown up with so much porn and female imagery that it just feels normal but it's not.  

I am, by trade many things including a scientist. So, let's leave the moral and ethical debates and the burgeoning sex slave trade for a minute and look at some science. Although not my field I have a particular interest in neurology.  Dr Valerie Voon has studied the impacts of porn on the brain - I believe this paper has yet to published and is in peer-review.  However, the impact of pleasurable behaviour is not disputed, see: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0896627309010459
while addictions to porn are a recognised phenomena.

A more accessible precis can be found here:
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/sep/26/brain-scans-porn-addicts-sexual-tastes

An addiction's ability to change behaviour is well documented and across large social groups is an especially powerful feature that should not be ignored.  Imagine you were forced to eat chocolate or smoke cigarettes where ever you turned in your daily routine - how long before you became addicted, how long before your behaviour changed to accommodate this need?

For those with short attention spans (tl:dr) I'll leave you with this excerpt:

the actual fuck?  While this doesn't really even warrant a response I'm just going to drop this here anyway.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grace_Hopper

The speculation board isn't exactly filled with the brightest minds, if you haven't noticed

Good point. Mind if I ask what your education background is? One of the STEM fields (which probably unites a majority of early adopters in most tech-related innovations)?

Then again, I noticed there's a number of (sometimes older) guys in here that are quite far from those fields (there's a pretty funny dude who seems to work with barn wood, and he seems to be btc loaded ).

Maybe there is *some* element of 'willingness to take potentially irrational risks' involved. Don't want to sound cliche, but there is to my knowledge (though I'm not a biologist or psychologist) some scientific evidence that men are slightly more inclined to take greater risks*, which puts them at a disadvantage at times, but can also pay off if things work out.

Would be interesting to have a survey (among both men and women) to see if, on average, the early BTC are "risk takers", by comparison...


* claims like that require proof, I know. If requested, I'll look up the sources for it.