What Are You Doing Right Now? (322 Viewers)
- Thread starter ßöмßäяðîëя
- Start date
- Tags gay space iliveforfinasteride iliveforjuve is not white loldevil size queens sweet matt is sweet errwhere virgin devil
- - - Updated - - -
Some would but that was a strictly economic tool, some women still adhere to the traditional role and that carries no moral qualms, so I'd say that's a false equivalence.
Women with very significant contributions from only post-1900 when women were actually allowed to have a voice in these fields:
Sciences (Physics, Chemistry, Neuroscience, Math, etc):
Lise Meitner
Vera Rubin
Lene Hau
Deborah Jin
Jocelyn Bell
Lisa Randall
Nergis Mavalvala
Margaret Burbridge
Marie Curie
Irene Curie
Ada Yonath
Fabiola Gianotti
Margaret Murnane
Maria Goeppert Mayer
Dorothy Hodgkin
Andrea Ghez
Chien-Shiung Wu
Mildred Dresselhaus
Ana Maria Rey
Margaret Geller
Helen Quinn
Beth Stevens
Danielle Bassett
Melody Swartz
Julia Robinson
Maria Chudnovsky
Claire Gmachl
etc
Philosophy:
Simone De Beauvoir
Julie Kristeva
Judith Butler
Hannah Arendt
Susan Haack
Mary Midgley
Elizabeth Anscombe
Simone Weil
Luce Irigaray
Ayn Rand
etc
Literature:
The list is well-nigh endless.
No contributions? Right... Ignorance at its finest.
What a cesspit. See ya.
Sciences (Physics, Chemistry, Neuroscience, Math, etc):
Lise Meitner
Vera Rubin
Lene Hau
Deborah Jin
Jocelyn Bell
Lisa Randall
Nergis Mavalvala
Margaret Burbridge
Marie Curie
Irene Curie
Ada Yonath
Fabiola Gianotti
Margaret Murnane
Maria Goeppert Mayer
Dorothy Hodgkin
Andrea Ghez
Chien-Shiung Wu
Mildred Dresselhaus
Ana Maria Rey
Margaret Geller
Helen Quinn
Beth Stevens
Danielle Bassett
Melody Swartz
Julia Robinson
Maria Chudnovsky
Claire Gmachl
etc
Philosophy:
Simone De Beauvoir
Julie Kristeva
Judith Butler
Hannah Arendt
Susan Haack
Mary Midgley
Elizabeth Anscombe
Simone Weil
Luce Irigaray
Ayn Rand
etc
Literature:
The list is well-nigh endless.
No contributions? Right... Ignorance at its finest.
What a cesspit. See ya.
Everybody knows Otto Hahn did all the work for Lise Meitner
Or perhaps in another case of women receiving no credit, it was Ida Noddack who suggested that Fermi’s neutron irradiation experiments may have led to uranium fission, and that he should look at elements lighter than lead as possibilities for the observed radioactivity.
Pretty much, but that's just typical X behavior. Say an outlandish statement and then when confronted about it, twists it around by saying people lack reading comprehension. See Buffon not being good in the '90s, F not being equal to M times A, denying holocaust, etc. At least Dusan isn't trying to twist what he says by blaming people for having bad reading comprehension.
This was the first comment:
"women have not contributed to the advancement of humanity in either science, technology or philosophy. Their forced entry into the workplace has indeed rendered marriage obsolete and as a result made for a more promiscuous society."
"Forced entry in the workforce": technically women have been in the workforce forever but he must be talking about the white collar workforce, right? To become part of the white collar workforce, you need an education and college degree. Keep in mind for example that Harvard Medical school only started accepting women in 1945. At a much lower rate then men. So they were not on equal footing, which can explain why they haven't gotten as many chances as men.
"has indeed rendered marriage obsolete" - not quite true as people still get married every day. They do get married less and at an older age but there is no way to contribute the decrease in rate of marriage to women being in the workforce. A study done by Pewter states that:
"Marriage, while declining among all groups, remains the norm for adults with a college education and good income but is now markedly less prevalent among those on the lower rungs of the socio-economic ladder."
"In 2008, there was a 16 percentage point gap in marriage rates between college graduates (64%) and those with a high school diploma or less (48%). In 1960, this gap had been just four percentage points (76% vs. 72%). The survey finds that those with a high school diploma or less are just as likely as those with a college degree to say they want to marry. But they place a higher premium than college graduates (38% versus 21%) on financial stability as a very important reason to marry."
So the women in the workforce (or at least white collar workforce) are getting married, it's the people who don't make a lot of money that don't see getting married as necessary. IMO, people now have more options and ability to chase after things they enjoy doing rather than settling down in a loveless and soul-sucking marriage because "that's what everyone does". Nothing wrong with that.
The next comment: "and as a result made for a more promiscuous society." Promiscuous is a derogatory word, first of all. Type it in on google and right above the definition it says derogatory. Then he says to Matt:
"That things are not better that's his interpretation which in this case really boils down to personal preference. "
That tells us his interpretation of women is negative or derogatory based on his previous statement. Or maybe it's just his lack of writing comprehension. Not an invalid theory given that his grammar is pretty atrocious.
But let's get back to the point at hand. The society we're in now is more promiscuous. Promiscuous means "having or characterized by many transient relationships". Surprisingly, people are now having less sex (according to bbc, NYT, etc) than in the previous millenium while women continue to gain ground on the workforce. So this completely invalidates the theory that the promiscuity is due to women forcing their entry into the workforce, because then the more and better jobs they get, the more promiscuous sex they'd have, right?
And lastly, I'd like to mention women like Rosalie Franklin and Barbara McClintock who are responsible for how far we have gotten in DNA research, Grace Hooper who created the first compiler, which translates human coding language into binary, Rachel Carson who has helped us take care of the environment and our bodies through her research and efforts to ban the pesticide DDT, Dorothy Hodgkin who helped pave the way to saving countless lives by discovering a technique of mass producing insulin and penicillin, and many more women who have contributed to science and technology, among other things.
This was the first comment:
"women have not contributed to the advancement of humanity in either science, technology or philosophy. Their forced entry into the workplace has indeed rendered marriage obsolete and as a result made for a more promiscuous society."
"Forced entry in the workforce": technically women have been in the workforce forever but he must be talking about the white collar workforce, right? To become part of the white collar workforce, you need an education and college degree. Keep in mind for example that Harvard Medical school only started accepting women in 1945. At a much lower rate then men. So they were not on equal footing, which can explain why they haven't gotten as many chances as men.
"has indeed rendered marriage obsolete" - not quite true as people still get married every day. They do get married less and at an older age but there is no way to contribute the decrease in rate of marriage to women being in the workforce. A study done by Pewter states that:
"Marriage, while declining among all groups, remains the norm for adults with a college education and good income but is now markedly less prevalent among those on the lower rungs of the socio-economic ladder."
"In 2008, there was a 16 percentage point gap in marriage rates between college graduates (64%) and those with a high school diploma or less (48%). In 1960, this gap had been just four percentage points (76% vs. 72%). The survey finds that those with a high school diploma or less are just as likely as those with a college degree to say they want to marry. But they place a higher premium than college graduates (38% versus 21%) on financial stability as a very important reason to marry."
So the women in the workforce (or at least white collar workforce) are getting married, it's the people who don't make a lot of money that don't see getting married as necessary. IMO, people now have more options and ability to chase after things they enjoy doing rather than settling down in a loveless and soul-sucking marriage because "that's what everyone does". Nothing wrong with that.
The next comment: "and as a result made for a more promiscuous society." Promiscuous is a derogatory word, first of all. Type it in on google and right above the definition it says derogatory. Then he says to Matt:
"That things are not better that's his interpretation which in this case really boils down to personal preference. "
That tells us his interpretation of women is negative or derogatory based on his previous statement. Or maybe it's just his lack of writing comprehension. Not an invalid theory given that his grammar is pretty atrocious.
But let's get back to the point at hand. The society we're in now is more promiscuous. Promiscuous means "having or characterized by many transient relationships". Surprisingly, people are now having less sex (according to bbc, NYT, etc) than in the previous millenium while women continue to gain ground on the workforce. So this completely invalidates the theory that the promiscuity is due to women forcing their entry into the workforce, because then the more and better jobs they get, the more promiscuous sex they'd have, right?
And lastly, I'd like to mention women like Rosalie Franklin and Barbara McClintock who are responsible for how far we have gotten in DNA research, Grace Hooper who created the first compiler, which translates human coding language into binary, Rachel Carson who has helped us take care of the environment and our bodies through her research and efforts to ban the pesticide DDT, Dorothy Hodgkin who helped pave the way to saving countless lives by discovering a technique of mass producing insulin and penicillin, and many more women who have contributed to science and technology, among other things.