What Are You Doing Right Now? (330 Viewers)

Post Ironic

Post Ironic

Senior Member
#349,101
Feb 9, 2013
42,253
#349,101
It's either intellectual dishonesty or intellectual laziness to claim that Pierre Curie is responsible for the work of Marie Curie. It was Pierre who dropped his own research into Crystals to join Marie in her research and it was made very clear that their research was hers, first and foremost. Add to that, she won a second Nobel, this time in chemistry, for research and discoveries she made several years after Pierre's death.

Second. Giving Sartre credit for Simone De Beauvoir's work is equally laughable. Even more so considering her Second Sex is far more important to the modern discourse than anything Sartre wrote.

To state that one's own negative opinion of women's contributions in the sciences and humanities is "a simple fact" while providing no evidence at all, and displaying a stunning ignorance of female scientists and philosophers and the contributions they have made, is ludicrous. Not one of the names ALC and I provided have been discredited, no argument has been set forth as to why these dozens of women didn't make significant contributions; yet somehow, we should all just accept the "simple fact" that they didn't, or that their contributions are actually propaganda and it was men behind the scenes who were really responsible.

Laughable.
 

Buy on AliExpress.com
GordoDeCentral

GordoDeCentral

Diez
Moderator
#349,103
Apr 14, 2005
70,776
#349,103
pitbull said:
Just took a smelly double dump, kind of looked like an x. So relieved I can share this knowing that @X reading comprehension is 10/10, this forum is blessed to have this humble genius as a mod
Click to expand...
How cute that I am haunting even your most intimate moments, I'm flattered

- - - Updated - - -

Also @Nomuken you know I can see deleted posts right?

- - - Updated - - -

Quetzalcoatl said:
@IliveForJuve @GordoDeCentral

What are some sexy terms of endearment to tell a Spanish speaker?
Click to expand...
May I ask why
 
Quetzalcoatl

Quetzalcoatl

It ain't hard to tell
#349,109
Aug 22, 2007
66,748
#349,109
Seven

Seven

In bocca al lupo, Fabio.
#349,115
Jun 25, 2003
39,314
#349,115
Post Ironic said:
It's either intellectual dishonesty or intellectual laziness to claim that Pierre Curie is responsible for the work of Marie Curie. It was Pierre who dropped his own research into Crystals to join Marie in her research and it was made very clear that their research was hers, first and foremost. Add to that, she won a second Nobel, this time in chemistry, for research and discoveries she made several years after Pierre's death.

Second. Giving Sartre credit for Simone De Beauvoir's work is equally laughable. Even more so considering her Second Sex is far more important to the modern discourse than anything Sartre wrote.

To state that one's own negative opinion of women's contributions in the sciences and humanities is "a simple fact" while providing no evidence at all, and displaying a stunning ignorance of female scientists and philosophers and the contributions they have made, is ludicrous. Not one of the names ALC and I provided have been discredited, no argument has been set forth as to why these dozens of women didn't make significant contributions; yet somehow, we should all just accept the "simple fact" that they didn't, or that their contributions are actually propaganda and it was men behind the scenes who were really responsible.

Laughable.
Click to expand...

I just can't think of a single reason that would explain why women would not be able to contribute as much as men in these fields. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying men and women are equal. Most women's sports bore me to death and I think it's ridiculous that some people are apparently not able to see the clear physical differences between men and women.

But this is something that fundamentally comes down to intelligence. And I just don't see why women would be any less intelligent than men. Surely if this were the case we would have substantial proof of this by now? In the form of women scoring significantly less on IQ tests for example.
 
GordoDeCentral

GordoDeCentral

Diez
Moderator
#349,116
Apr 14, 2005
70,776
#349,116
Seven said:
I just can't think of a single reason that would explain why women would not be able to contribute as much as men in these fields. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying men and women are equal. Most women's sports bore me to death and I think it's ridiculous that some people are apparently not able to see the clear physical differences between men and women.

But this is something that fundamentally comes down to intelligence. And I just don't see why women would be any less intelligent than men. Surely if this were the case we would have substantial proof of this by now? In the form of women scoring significantly less on IQ tests for example.
Click to expand...
It's not down to just intelligence, there is priorities in life and of course time of 'expiry' for that raison D etre of ours, reproduction. How many women want to sleep with a famous older male scientist? How many men want to sleep with a famous older female one?
Anything can be construed as contribution, but a major revolutionary one with ripples in time and across fields, women are just not there.
 
Quetzalcoatl

Quetzalcoatl

It ain't hard to tell
#349,117
Aug 22, 2007
66,748
#349,117
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 1, Guests: 316)