largerthanlife Archive

Upvotes	Title	Category	Author	Subreddit	Date (UTC)
10	Studies indicating greater male variability?		largerthanlife	/r/MensRights	09/12/11 06:18 PM

Upvotes	Comment on	Subreddit	Date (UTC)
8	How Do Feminists Explain Immunology? No, give the guy some credit. From it's inception, the term "politically correct" was an ironic one. While I think most people would agree it has a fair basis in fact, pointing out the fact that it's origins are dismissive is not itself a reason to call someone a troll. I'm also inclined to agree with him. There's really no basis for going from biological physical differences (OF COURSE they exist, starting with penises and vaginas), to implying a MEANINGFUL quantification of psychological and b…	/r/MensRights	09/11/12 10:53 PM
1	"Gamestop will always hire a woman over a male. Even if the male has a huge amount of experience, knowledge of video games, and isn't a social retard. It's just how corporate works." Should I set up a Kickstarter video? I bet I'd get a few pledges.	/r/MensRights	08/03/12 07:00 PM
7	"Gamestop will always hire a woman over a male. Even if the male has a huge amount of experience, knowledge of video games, and isn't a social retard. It's just how corporate works." Hooters, unlike Gamestop, is allowed to have this hiring policy, because their explicit theme is "Hooters": http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BFOQ If I open up a restaurant named "Packages", where people walk around in overtight leather pants, I'm allowed to hire only male servers. But otherwise it's illegal.	/r/MensRights	08/03/12 03:08 PM
1	"Gamestop will always hire a woman over a male. Even if the male has a huge amount of experience, knowledge of video games, and isn't a social retard. It's just how corporate works." That's not actually true. Civil rights legislation states that certain characteristics can not be used as a basis for hiring, unless they are a BFOQ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BFOQ Further, there is a thing called "adverse impact" which states that a hiring outcome, or a hiring test that produces a demographically disproportionate outcome relative to the hiring pool, can be subject for scrutiny. In the case of tests, the burden is to show that any test represents a valid (in the scientific sen…	/r/MensRights	08/03/12 03:04 PM
1	"Gamestop will always hire a woman over a male. Even if the male has a huge amount of experience, knowledge of video games, and isn't a social retard. It's just how corporate works." Those jobs represent an instance of a BFOQ, which sales does not: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BFOQ	/r/MensRights	08/03/12 02:56 PM
1	"Gamestop will always hire a woman over a male. Even if the male has a huge amount of experience, knowledge of video games, and isn't a social retard. It's just how corporate works." Companies are not allowed to hire giving any weight to gender, unless it qualifies as a Bona Fide Occupational Qualification: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BFOQ Hooters, for instance, exists as an entity about, well, boobs, so having them is an employment requirement. Similarly with fashion models, where men and women are obviously not interchangeable in their respective roles. "It might sell more"/"It makes people more relaxed"/"It makes for a better environment" and such are not BFOQ's, no. And…	/r/MensRights	08/03/12 02:54 PM
5	Janet Howell, a Virginia State Senator, attached a amendment to a abortion bill to require men to have rectal exams before getting a Viagra prescription. I don't actually have a problem with this. This was legitimate political theatre. She knew that the amendment would fail, or, if not, it would kill the bill. So she wasn't really hating on men. As she pointed out, she was pleased she got the votes she did. Her point was that where people were force through legislation an expensive and medically unnecessary procedure (a "you must look at your baby" ultrasound), in order to make the doctors office (a place otherwise private and in the hands of doc…	/r/MensRights	01/02/12 07:39 PM
1	Hi r/MensRights, I am taking a Psychology course this semester and we are discussing whether or not men suffer depression as often as women. Not sure. Clinical depression, especially in its chronic form (which is a syndrome often quite different from the more transient forms. Both stink, though), is a difficult thing to describe in an intro psych class. It's really not sadness, or being down, but a cognitive mental restructuring as well. Generally speaking, psychologists do take things like gender-based expressivity into account, as well as social pressure, so I'd be inclined to think there is some validity to the statement that wome…	/r/MensRights	01/02/12 07:23 PM
2	Women in McDonald’s Fight Seen Widely Online Plead Not Guilty Thanks for the info. I still can't say I'm comfortable with the situation, what with his evident refusal to desist after both women were on the ground, ignoring both the words and physical admonitions of those around him. Still, I recognize that this was a complex situation. I stand by my assessment, however, that the salient features of the actual case are irrelevant to MR.	/r/MensRights	17/01/12 10:54 PM
2	Is 'women and children' first a real rule? So it goes. And yet, if I'm inferring your identity properly, the valid elements of MR subject matter, such as they are, would be very well served by the participation of a rationally-minded "other" such as yourself. It's a shame. But the behavior is no worse than normal, I suppose. Since we're talking evolutionary cultural paradigms, that's another one for you: tribalistic thinking is hard for any group to shake.	/r/MensRights	17/01/12 09:08 PM
1	Women in McDonald’s Fight Seen Widely Online Plead Not Guilty Interesting, and thanks for the additional context. Though, I have to say, I hope that his supposed "conditioning" wasn't just an uncritically accepted anecdote from the employee (i.e., juries going "we see black people, so of course we believe him when he says the place is violent"). The actual evidence, again, shows other employees who didn't seem similarly conditioned at all, and were seemingly trying to defuse the situation.	/r/MensRights	17/01/12 02:50 PM
3	Is 'women and children' first a real rule? I'm really surprised that people here will happily point out the same thing (expendable men) as justification for higher pay, but get off put and downvote when they see how broadly that cultural principle applies. If you think things need change, folks, fine, but start with the reality you have, not the one you wish you had.	/r/MensRights	17/01/12 02:36 PM
2	Is 'women and children' first a real rule? From an evolutionary perspective, both are pretty well founded. Wombs are pretty hard to replace, while reduced men can easily pick up any reproductive "slack." Similarly, children represent future productivity and reproduction. So societies that were well trained to protect these things first did well. Whether you think it's appropriate in the current societal context is a different question, but the fact that we have such a plan in the first place shouldn't be terribly surprising. See Thinks_L…	/r/MensRights	17/01/12 02:32 PM
1	Women in McDonald’s Fight Seen Widely Online Plead Not Guilty I don't think these women should get off, but the guy was not even close to being in the right, either. If you watch the video, it's plain that after he came back with the weapon (not sure what it was), the two women fell down, but he continued to beat them on the ground, despite his fellow employees trying to calm him down. Proportionality is a well defined legal concept in self-defence, irrespective of gender. He definitely didn't have it here. The women were in the wrong with what they did, b…	/r/MensRights	14/01/12 10:07 PM
1	Studies indicating greater male variability? Hmm, the date on this (1st) edition is 2010. I found that talk years ago, so I suppose that the book is about the talk, not the other way around. Doesn't mean he might not have more cites in this book, though. I'll look in to it. Thanks.	/r/MensRights	10/12/11 03:59 PM
1	Studies indicating greater male variability? Cool, thanks.	/r/MensRights	10/12/11 03:51 PM
1	Studies indicating greater male variability? Your point taken as well, but I'm not so much undervaluing the reality as just saying it's not useful for my goals here. I'm talking here: http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/n5atr/greater_phenotypic_variability_among_males/ about the underlying genetic mechanisms that might lead to and maintain greater male variability over the years. We realized we should probably do better about identifying the traits for which there is (or is not) greater variability in men, lest we just sit around s…	/r/MensRights	10/12/11 03:51 PM
1	Studies indicating greater male variability? Thanks for the story, but I suppose I was unclear. You're talking about it from an evolutionary standpoint, and I well know the story of sequestering variability in men as they are less essential. However, from a genetic standpoint, it's a more complex affair. It's not obvious how to describe the mechanism that would maintain differential genetic/trait variability in men over multiple generations. A discussion is over at askscience here, if you're interested, though it's a bit stalled, and I cam…	/r/MensRights	10/12/11 03:24 PM
1	Studies indicating greater male variability? Thanks. Though, I don't see why greater variability in hard traits, if present in men, would be a non-topic. Descriptively, sure, easy enough to document it and move on. But whether hard or soft traits, something implying that men's outcomes are extra sensitive to...well, SOMETHING, producing greater variability, would still be a significant concept in genetics/evolution. Yeah, the why side is currently being discussed over at askscience. Partly, though, because I find the "men as containers for…	/r/MensRights	09/12/11 09:26 PM
1	Studies indicating greater male variability? Thanks. Man, it's been a long time since I've seen that one. But yeah, that's what first planted the thought. Problem is, it's a transcript of a talk, and so nothing is cited. He didn't publish this elsewhere, did he?	/r/MensRights	09/12/11 09:26 PM
1	Studies indicating greater male variability? Thanks. That kind of stuff is interesting, and perhaps evocative of the issue, but not really sufficient by itself. Greater Nobel laureates could be explained by higher ambition, say, or more social incentive to achieve, or whatever. Could be aptitude, but The IQ one is notable in the sense that the male distribution curve is supposedly flatter--more men of extreme high AND low capacity, which is, IMHO, a much more evolutionarily interesting concept. Why would that be? As I mention elsewhere, so…	/r/MensRights	09/12/11 09:26 PM