@Pigeon's banner p

Pigeon

coo coo

1 follower   follows 0 users  
joined 2022 September 04 22:48:43 UTC

				

User ID: 237

Pigeon

coo coo

1 follower   follows 0 users   joined 2022 September 04 22:48:43 UTC

					

No bio...


					

User ID: 237

Great show.

In terms of the writer’s political views, the show seems rather unusual. While seeking more women and less Oxford classicists in the bureaucracy, the writers also seem fairly keen on conscription and the build-up of Britain’s conventional forces, vaguely Euroskeptic. Meanwhile they seem to favour school choice, joke about the excesses of political correctness. The abiding theme is a distrust in the competence of politicians and the alignment of the bureaucracy with British interests.

That the show’s politics are a bit eclectic and ultimately converge on some vague anti-establishmentarianism shouldn’t be too much of a surprise, given that it was co-written by a right-winger and a left-winger.

Is the tenor of the US towards West German reconstruction significantly different from Japanese reconstruction esp post 1950?

I assume it's because that's the revealed preference in sexual partner rather than the declared one?

I mean, really, what percentage of women died in childbirth before modern medicine? Enough that we could say that pregnancy is unhealthy?

Pregnancy surely is unhealthy for the individual. Even without counting within-pregnancy/immediate postpartum things like pre/eclampsia and risk of hemorrhage amongst a litany of other issues, there are potential long term sequelae like pelvic wall issues (leading to incontinence) and increased risk of diabetes (if a lady is unlucky enough to have gestational diabetes). (I think there’s also something about increased risk of dental issues and permanent skin changes but I’m not sure or very knowledgeable on that front)

The period following WW2 makes more sense, oops. Thanks.

Still feel like it’s qualitatively different, do we call Germany a victim of colonisation?

somebody could suggest them to look into the history of Japan? I think there are a lot of similarities there, with regard to being colonized

Japan was colonized? That’s news to me. Perry’s gunboats didn’t lead to concessions or annexations. Unless you count being forced to open ports and restrict tariffs as colonization…? That’s markedly different from South Africa.

>You take that back!

I can understand pixie cuts, but I will admit to finding the haphazardly-shaven or buzz-cut-esque haircuts common in queer circles to be bizarre and unattractive.

Also the…jewelry. Why nose rings?

It's too bad our food is so bad though. I really don't get it. We have all the ingredients to make good shit, we just choose not to.

Good to know that it's not just me being a foreigner, someone in the US also agrees that for some reason US can make good food but chooses not to.

I have to ask though, why is US chicken so bad? Was it always this bad? Is it because you guys bred those enormous hypertropied chickens?

Yeah, I figured. And men getting killed more often by non-spouse friends and family, too.

And what better way to shine than be positively radiant; to bathe in the blubber of the fallen, then setting themselves alight? Enduring that surely shows strength of character.

To plug those numbers in:

Of the estimated 4,970 female victims of murder and nonnegligent manslaughter in 2021, data reported by law enforcement agencies indicate that 1689.8 were killed by an intimate partner (figure 1). By comparison, about 1078.2 of the 17,970 males murdered that year were victims of intimate partner homicide.

Overall, 3777.2 of female murders and 10063.2 of male murders were perpetrated by someone known to the victim. About 795.2 of female murder victims were killed by a nonintimate family member—parent, grandparent, sibling, in-law, and other family member—compared to 1797 of male murder victims.

A larger percentage of males (3773.7) were murdered by a stranger than females (596.4). For 5990 male murder victims and 994 female murder victims, the relationship between the victim and the offender was unknown.

To be honest, it’s surprising to me that known intimate partner killings with a male victim is that high. Do we have stats on whether gay couples kill each other more or less often? (Though the majority of that still has to be from women since gay men simply aren’t that much of the population, unless gay men really love murdering each other)

Oh, no doubt agricultural work is very difficult, and I would much prefer my current lifestyle to that of a tenant farmer. But I am saying that the Industrial Revolution was uniquely bad for workers. I’m pretty sure I would drop dead doing factory work of a hundred to two hundred years past, but I’ve seen farm-work done before in rural China with limited modern equipment and amenities, for instance — it is hard work, but it is doable.

The risk of famine is well taken, though.


My understanding of why peasants flooded the cities was because of changing economic incentives — unemployment in farms due to industrialization and different crop preferences lead to massive unemployment amongst farmers, who migrated to cities to look for work.

This might be a peculiarly modern phenomenon, though. My understanding is that while pre-modern society was much poorer, it afforded more time for leisure even for the average peasant and farmer — the Industrial Revolution provided working conditions that were much, much worse than what came before.

Even in ancient times there are jobs that are dreadful like salt mining, of course, but that wasn’t the norm.

I suppose I was reacting more to the idea that it's a subculture thing now, when it's...pretty mainstream, I think.

Is finance at sex parity at this point? Colour me surprised.

It actually is still decently common in the right circles, it would just never be portrayed positively or innocently in a movie anymore.

Still common in Australia, I believe.

I agree with the broader gist of this, but a few things to pick on.

Broad swathes of the job market are largely closed to women. Now I don't mean literally closed, in fact most job classes actively discriminate in favour of women and judge them more leniently for poor performance. What I mean is for the 80% of women who will one day become mothers, many jobs are simply impossible to juggle with that: Virtually every job worked outdoors, finance and law, construction, academia, etc. Not to mention that some of these professions make a woman less attractive a mate to a man because men don't value women for their incomes, but prize femininity and future capacity to have children and fit them into their lives.

I'm not sure that's true of law and academia, with some caveats.


And I think the passage below proves too much:

One in nine adult American women are either a teacher or nurse. Expand the top job titles to say 25 and that accounts for ~50% of total female employment. Women crowd into these fields partly because of innate biology, but also because these professions -- being dominated by women -- cater to women's fertility preferences. And what are these jobs like? Poorly paid drudgery for the most part.


  • I thought nurses were paid quite well? They are, where I practice. Looking up American statistics, nursing pays 77k median and 82k average in the States; I would think this qualifies as pretty good.

  • Look at top job titles for both sexes and you’ll find that most work is poorly paid drudgery. It is true that on the male side you get jobs like finance and engineering that are male dominated and are high status/remunerated well, but this is by and large not the majority of work for either sex. I would wager at least – likely significantly more than – 50% of men work as some sort of tradesperson, construction worker, retail, transport, factory working, security, or farming. This even excludes the poorly paid white collar drudgery that you could count administration and most of “tech work” in (For what it was worth, I did check the statistics with at least one Anglosphere country.) (I suppose you could quibble with how poorly paid e.g. tradespeople are, given the meme of 100+k cushy plumber jobs etc, but my understanding is that on average they don’t outearn teachers – and they get to wreck their bodies for it!)

  • Conversely, looking at jobs that aren’t poorly paid drudgery, women don’t do that badly, especially given that the shift towards large-scale employment of women is only a few decades old. Younger doctors – as a complete cohort – are close to parity, women now outnumber men going to medical school, and female-dominated medical careers aren’t necessarily inferior in pay (and surgeons are predominantly male but also the life of a surgeon isn’t what most women or men want out of life); lawyers are at parity IIRC; accountants and auditors are now mostly women;…

  • Considering the above, I think the effect of women clustering into fewer types of jobs is less pronounced than you posit. Sex gaps still exist, of course, but sex gaps in favour of women are in as many professions as sex gaps for men now, and on the whole the female-dominant professions look only somewhat worse compared to the male-dominant ones, and that only because senior management and engineering are still male-slanted. (Like, would you rather be a psychologist/a physiotherapist or a bus driver/a butcher?)

On the other hand, I think it’s fairly well that women tend to cluster around the lower-paid strata of each industry, even if the sex gap amongst both the highly-paid and the lowly-paid isn’t quite a yawning gulf. Even if lawyers are at parity (or over parity) at this point, I’m pretty sure partners are still mostly men; and despite relative parity in the lower ranks of academia more men than women attempt to go for professorship, even if the actual tenure-track population is surprisingly close to parity at this point (I think 44-56 or something?). I think that’s probably partial evidence for biological impulses lifestyle decisions having an impact on employment, amongside other factors such as the female workforce being much newer to the game than the male one.

*edit to clarify ambiguous sentence

The Chinese politburo has a fair few with a basis in science and engineering, I made a post about it a while ago which was contested. Xi at least has an engineering background, other Politburo members have tiny wikipedia pages. https://www.themotte.org/post/238/what-if-your-entire-worldview-was/44213?context=8#context

My understanding was that politburo members were, at one point, mostly or completely of an engineering or science background, but this has relaxed recently. Regardless, the point stands.

I think this holds for the other East Asian countries though, even with a pretty low estimation of the Diet or the National Assembly of Korea.

Wonder what it’s like in other countries.

Getting a high score in English was piss easy. Japanese also wasn’t too bad.

Chinese, on the other hand, was actually quite difficult, and the types of questions also were more varied. Are Chinese students that much more literate compared to Japan?

Something about the calibration of this seems wrong.

Ah, I see. That makes more sense then.

On the concept of structural racism, perhaps it can help to think of it in slightly shifted terms. What if, instead of the structure itself being a product of evil thoughts, the structure produces the racism (such as it is).

For what it’s worth, this was what I thought it meant before being corrected on this by social reality.

This is where intersectionality and the concept of race as a construct is perhaps useful. Rather than monoliths, ethnic minorities have their own status structures and hierarchies. They do not lose those entirely when coming to another country or culture.

I thought this was part of the dictionary definition of intersectionality, the one that’s not used like a flag?

For stage 2 they are immediately driven over to the Mr Olympia stage and pose in front of 5000 people next to actual contestanfs. This will test their bullshitting and out-angling skills, which are the most important elite skills (have to look like the bigger guy in the hand shake photo ops)

Only if they’re driven over naked, with the blood of the slain still caked on their skin.

Funny that the younger generations are increasingly watching Asian cartoons then. I hear anime is cool now? Was it K-pop that white girls in the states moon over?

And sports? Really?

The key to getting into the ground floor of facebook or netflix or paypal wasn't technical skill, it was who they knew.

For the tech ground floor, I suspect a Harvard degree would mean quite a bit less than it usually does, though. Aren’t the big (and notoriously hard) schools still MIT, Stanford, and CMU closely followed by Berkeley?

Which leads me to think — it’s true that Harvard is universally regarded as elite by Everyone, but when we take into account specific disciplines, different schools start to jump up; and the more specialized you go, the more true this is, to the extent that some people going for a PhD in the hard sciences will forgo Ivy League invitations in favour of offers by schools with that one specific professor.

Which fits into the original point by the OP — this sort of skill and display of intelligence is nerd stuff, only distantly related to class signaling.