Monday, December 28, 2015

Women want to heal, men want to build rockets

From Pew, heaven bless its naive honesty:


Choice! (and a mother's regret?)











This is blasphemy! Personal choice cannot--MUST NOT!--have anything to do with how contemporary Western women behave. The misogyny of the patriarchy explains why there are so relatively few women in the STEM fields!

11 comments:

jjbees said...

I'm in medicine and there's lots of room for technological interest. All advances in human health and longevity are basically made by STEM types.

Women are into healthcare because they can be "nurturing" as nurses, but real medicine is nurturing + STEM, but there are lots of STEM only medical scientists, and clinician-researchers in the middle.

Dan said...

The leftist project is very hard to maintain because there are just too many variables.

One example I've noticed:

Children's clothing is extremely differentiated by gender these days. In terms of both the color and the fit, there is basically no overlap. It is basically impossible for me to confuse my daughters' clothes with my son's. Even things that seem generic like jeans are dramatically different for the girls and the boys. The former are tight, have flowery stitching patterns and few pockets and are made of thinner material. The latter are baggy, made of a heavy material, have lots of pockets and straight line stitching patterns.

My sister and I sometimes accidentally swapped jeans as kids, since they looked basically the same, but that could never happen today.

The result of this is that worldwide, boys and girls are sharply differentiated in appearance. The west does not even have control and could not F this up even if they wanted to, since 99% of all children's clothes are made in Asia.

Dan said...

And even if a western company controls the design, they still have to sell product. Which is why even though western elites hate Christianity, Christmas gets bigger every year. The imperative is, move product uber alles.

Dan said...

Another example is TV, actually. On the one hand is the apparent effort to pound homosexuality down our throats non-stop (sorry).

But on the other hand, men in TV are manlier and women are sexier than in real life and this tendency is only increasing. In other words, in appearance at least, the sexual dimorphism of TV characters exaggerates real life. Even on the cast of Girls, Jabba the Dunham surrounded herself with women that are above average in looks.

I was recently watching Vikings on Netflix (terrific program). The boy vikings are on the outer tail of hairy, manly brutishness. The girl vikings are small-boned hotties.

http://www.monstersandcritics.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/L-to-R_-Lagertha-Katheryn-Winnick-and-Ragnar-Travis-Fimmel-1024x682.jpg

This is of course a genetically impossible. The manliest men have at least somewhat manly moms and a cute little thing will birth more effete sons. But in these shows sex differences are sharpened.

Would Roseanne get a part on TV today if she wasn't in charge of the project? No but hell no.

Dan said...

Another example of the sharp dimorphism I am talking about. This is also from Vikings, Ragnar's brother Rollo and his wife Siggy. Look at her jaw and bone structure and his.

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/d9/74/90/d97490d37d3125750562f9c6ca0c9c73.jpg

Audacious Epigone said...

Jjbees,

Right. This is more a statement of interest that presumably translates to a large degree into career orientation.

Dan,

Great points.

So you'd recommend Vikings? With an infant and a toddler, Netflix is one of the non-obligatory things we can still manage to do together. We're slowly working through Parenthood (her choice) and then my number is up.

Dan said...

Yes, I would. I was dejected when we ran out of episodes. I think we bought the most recent season 3 from Amazon instant play. Vikings is rather violent if you don't mind. But its exciting with terrific scenery and history. It's cinematic quality in my view.

I have to say that when it comes to cinematic stuff, the golden age in history is right now.

Dan said...

Historical shows manage to escape the poz sickness that infects so many shows.

One of the most pro-conservative shows on television is Blue Bloods. It makes cops awesome again. The heroes are Tom Selleck as morally flawless Police Chief Reagan (yeah, they even took the name Reagan) and his son Danny who is a detective that uses dubious tactics to righteously and heroically get the bad guys, because sometimes you have to cross a few lines, you know. The grandpa is an ex police chief, the other son is also a police officer, they pray at the dinner table with their beautiful families and then a few lone liberal opinions are aired by the attorney sister before being totally smacked down by the men.


jjbees said...

My mom loves Blue Bloods.

The show speaks to traditionalists in a big way, I think. The sitting around the dinner table, the family sticking together, those aren't necessarily only conservative values, they cut across politics. Lots of liberals enjoy family dinner. Though they do tend to not have many children, so I could be wrong. They do tend to invest and care highly for the few they do have.

Audacious Epigone said...

The suggestions are much appreciated, thanks. Probably start with Blue Bloods. It'll probably have the broader appeal, heh.

Jack Burton said...

Don't be fooled by the motivation. I've heard countless women say they want to be nurses because of the benefits, job security and good pay.

The best nurses I've encountered were actually men.

The hospitals here are infested with affirmative action quota recipients, and even the white women are disinterested and often found in the halls gossiping.

The typical nurse is a cunt in my experience. They're more Nurse Ratched than Mother Theresa.